5. Comparative Analysis Of The Effectiveness Of Minimally Invasive Surgical Interventions For Kidney Stones

Authors

  • D.E. Mami NJSC “National Medical University named after S.D. Asfendiyarov”, JSC “Scientific Center of Urology named after B.U. Dzharbusynov”, urolithiasis and Endourology Department, Almaty, Kazakhstan
  • M.K. Alchinbaev NJSC “National Medical University named after S.D. Asfendiyarov”
  • D.I. Sengirbaev NJSC “National Medical University named after S.D. Asfendiyarov”
  • M.A. Malikh JSC “Scientific Center of Urology named after B.U. Dzharbusynov”, urolithiasis and Endourology Department, Almaty, Kazakhstan

Downloads

Abstract

Urolithiasis is an urgent worldwide public health problem, as it remains one of the most common diseases. Therefore, the study of factors that increase the effectiveness and safety of treatment of patients with nephrolithiasis is an important task of urology. This article provides a comparative analysis of the effectiveness of minimally invasive methods, such as retrograde pyelolithotripsy (RPL) and percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PCNL) for nephrolithiasis. Purpose of the study. Conduct a comparative assessment of the effectiveness of minimally invasive treatment for kidney stones..

Materials and methods. In the study, 109 patients with kidney stones who were hospitalized at the Scientific Center of Urology from 2017 to 2018. Retrograde pyelolithotripsy (RPT) was performed in 66 (60.5%) patients. Percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PCNL) in 43 (39.4%) patients. Of these, 54 (49.5%) are men and 55 (50.5%) are women.

Conclusion: A comparative analysis of the results of treatment of patients with kidney stones showed that RPT is not inferior to PCNL in its effectiveness. Moreover, the percentage of intraoperative and postoperative complications is higher with PCNL. The effectiveness of PCNL immediately after surgery was 76.5%, RPT - 78.8%. Efficiency after 1 month was 82.8% and 88.1%, respectively. After PCNL, a significant decrease in glomerular filtration rate is determined, which is not observed after RPT. Improving the surgical treatment of urolithiasis will improve the quality of life of the population suffering from urolithiasis, reduce the incidence and disability of the population, reduce the length of hospital stay and rehabilitation.

Keywords

RPT, PCNL

References

  1. Alchinbaev M.K., Mukhamedzhan I.T., Aubakirova A.T., Dakenova G.B. Analysis of the state of the uro-logical service of the Republic of Kazakhstan // Ana-lytical review for 2016 (sixth edition) // Almaty, 2017 - 18-19 pp
  2. Apolikhin O. I., Sivkov A. V., Moskaleva N. G., Solnt-seva T. V., Komarova V. A. // Analysis of the urone-phrological morbidity and mortality in the Russian Federation over a ten-year period (2002-2012) ac-cording to official statistics // Experimental and clini-cal urology.
  3. Statistical compilation 2017 // Incidence of the adult population of Russia in 2017 // statistical materials, part III // Table 3.68. - p.
  4. Brener Z.Z. // Nephrolithiasis: evaluation and man-agement // South Med. J.
  5. Fisang C., Anding R., Müller S.C, Latz S., Laube N. // Urolithiasis an interdisciplinary diagnostic, thera-peutic and secondary preventive challenge. // Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2015; 112 (6):83-91. doi:10.3238/arz-tebl.2015.0083
  6. Knoll T. Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, and Pathophys-iology of Urolithiasis. Eur Urol 2010;9:802-6. doi:10.1016/j.eursup.2010.11.006
  7. Yanenko E.K., Merinov D.S., Konstantinova O.V., Epishov V.A., Kalinichenko D.N. // Current trends in epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment of uroli-thiasis. // Experimental and Clinical Urology 2012; 3: 19–24
  8. Davidov M.I., Dremin E.I., Nikonova O.E., Gushchina T.S. // Epidemiology of urolithiasis in the Perm re-gion: results of a 30-year study // Experimental and Clinical Urology 2019; No. 3: pp. 4–10

Published

2020-07-01

Issue

No. 2 (2020)

Section

Статьи