The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Role of pelvicalyceal anatomy in the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for lower pole stones: outcomes with a systematic review of literature

Role of pelvicalyceal anatomy in the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for lower pole stones: outcomes with a systematic review of literature
Role of pelvicalyceal anatomy in the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for lower pole stones: outcomes with a systematic review of literature

Controversies exist on the influence of lower pole anatomy (infundibular pelvic angle, IPA; infundibular length, IL; and infundibular width, IW) for success and outcomes related to the treatment of stones in the lower pole. We wanted to look at the role of lower pole anatomy to study clinical outcomes in patients treated for isolated lower pole stones (LPS) using retrograde intra renal surgery (RIRS), and also perform a review to look at the published literature on the influence of pelvicalyceal anatomy on success with RIRS. Data were prospectively collected (June 2013-June 2016) for all patients who underwent RIRS for LPS, and the imaging was then retrospectively reviewed to calculate the IPA, IL and IW using the Elbahnasy method. A systematic review was also conducted for all English language articles between January 2000 and April 2018, reporting on the impact of pelvicaliceal anatomy on RIRS. A total of 108 patients with LPS were included with a male to female ratio of 2:3 and a mean age of 54.7 years. The mean lower pole stone size was 9.3 mm (range 3-29 mm) and 102/108 (94.4%) patients were stone free (SF) at the end of their procedure. While steep IPA (< 30°), operative time duration and larger stone size were significant predictors of failure, the placement of ureteric access sheath, IW and IL did not influence treatment outcomes. Six studies (460 patients) met the inclusion criteria for our review. The IPA, IW, IL for failure ranged from 26° to 38°, 5.5-7 mm and 24-34 mm, respectively. The SFR ranged from 78 to 88% with a metaanalysis showing IPA as the most important predictor of treatment outcomes for LPS. Infundibular pelvic angle seems to be the most important predictor for the treatment of LPS using RIRS. Pelvicalyceal anatomy in conjunction with stone size and hardness seem to dictate the success, and decisions on the type of surgical interventions should reflect this.

2194-7228
Karim, Sulaiman Sadaf
ddb3855d-682b-4965-8b6e-4ba818808827
Hanna, Luke
d4d264e5-3dbe-429d-92d8-556986bb7bd1
Geraghty, Robert
ef19149e-530f-4749-9740-0902fed96fe1
Somani, Bhaskar K
ab5fd1ce-02df-4b88-b25e-8ece396335d9
Karim, Sulaiman Sadaf
ddb3855d-682b-4965-8b6e-4ba818808827
Hanna, Luke
d4d264e5-3dbe-429d-92d8-556986bb7bd1
Geraghty, Robert
ef19149e-530f-4749-9740-0902fed96fe1
Somani, Bhaskar K
ab5fd1ce-02df-4b88-b25e-8ece396335d9

Karim, Sulaiman Sadaf, Hanna, Luke, Geraghty, Robert and Somani, Bhaskar K (2019) Role of pelvicalyceal anatomy in the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for lower pole stones: outcomes with a systematic review of literature. Urolithiasis. (doi:10.1007/s00240-019-01150-0).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Controversies exist on the influence of lower pole anatomy (infundibular pelvic angle, IPA; infundibular length, IL; and infundibular width, IW) for success and outcomes related to the treatment of stones in the lower pole. We wanted to look at the role of lower pole anatomy to study clinical outcomes in patients treated for isolated lower pole stones (LPS) using retrograde intra renal surgery (RIRS), and also perform a review to look at the published literature on the influence of pelvicalyceal anatomy on success with RIRS. Data were prospectively collected (June 2013-June 2016) for all patients who underwent RIRS for LPS, and the imaging was then retrospectively reviewed to calculate the IPA, IL and IW using the Elbahnasy method. A systematic review was also conducted for all English language articles between January 2000 and April 2018, reporting on the impact of pelvicaliceal anatomy on RIRS. A total of 108 patients with LPS were included with a male to female ratio of 2:3 and a mean age of 54.7 years. The mean lower pole stone size was 9.3 mm (range 3-29 mm) and 102/108 (94.4%) patients were stone free (SF) at the end of their procedure. While steep IPA (< 30°), operative time duration and larger stone size were significant predictors of failure, the placement of ureteric access sheath, IW and IL did not influence treatment outcomes. Six studies (460 patients) met the inclusion criteria for our review. The IPA, IW, IL for failure ranged from 26° to 38°, 5.5-7 mm and 24-34 mm, respectively. The SFR ranged from 78 to 88% with a metaanalysis showing IPA as the most important predictor of treatment outcomes for LPS. Infundibular pelvic angle seems to be the most important predictor for the treatment of LPS using RIRS. Pelvicalyceal anatomy in conjunction with stone size and hardness seem to dictate the success, and decisions on the type of surgical interventions should reflect this.

Text
Karim2019_Article_RoleOfPelvicalycealAnatomyInTh - Version of Record
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (1MB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 25 July 2019
e-pub ahead of print date: 1 August 2019

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 433294
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/433294
ISSN: 2194-7228
PURE UUID: c88e054e-624c-4a74-81e6-180f343597ba

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 13 Aug 2019 16:30
Last modified: 16 Mar 2024 03:23

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Sulaiman Sadaf Karim
Author: Luke Hanna
Author: Robert Geraghty

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×