1
|
Pietropaolo A, Geraghty R, Griffin S, Skolarikos A, Seitz C, Bujons A, Sriprasad S, Subramonian S, Smith D, Contreras P, Bernardo N, Esperto F, Emiliani E, De Coninck V, Tailly T, Keller EX, Talso M, Tonyali S, Sener ET, Hameed BMZ, Tzelves L, Ventimiglia E, Juliebø-Jones P, Mykoniatis I, Tsaturyan A, Bres-Niewada E, Somani BK. Worldwide trends of practice and intervention in paediatric endourology: comparison of European versus Non-European responses. Cent European J Urol 2023; 76:245-250. [PMID: 38045778 PMCID: PMC10690392 DOI: 10.5173/ceju.2023.79] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2023] [Revised: 07/19/2023] [Accepted: 08/28/2023] [Indexed: 12/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction The area of paediatric endourology is unique and is recognised to be challenging, and it requires a certain level of focused training and expertise. Our aim was to conduct a worldwide survey in order to gain an overview regarding the current practice patterns for minimally invasive treatments of paediatric upper urinary tract stone patients. Material and methods The survey was distributed between December 2021 and April 2022 through urology sections and societies in United Kingdom, Latin America and Asia. The survey was made up of 20 questions and it was distributed online using the free online Google Forms (TM). Results 221 urologists answered the survey with 56 responses each from India, South America and UK and 53 responses from the rest of Europe (15 countries). In total, 163 responders (73.7%) managed paediatric stone patients in their daily practice. Of the responders, 60.2% were adult urologists and 39.8% were paediatric urologists. 12.9% adult urologists and 20.4% paediatric urologists run independent clinics while some run combined adult and paediatric clinics sometimes with the support of the nephrologists. Only 33.9% urologists offered all surgical treatments [extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), ureteroscopy (URS) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS)]. Conclusions Treatment of paediatric stones can vary according to country and legislations. Based on the results of this survey, minimally invasive methods such as URS and mini PCNL seem to have become more popular. In most institutions a collaboration exists between adult and paediatric urologists, which is the key for a tailored decision making, counselling and treatment success.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amelia Pietropaolo
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom
- EAU Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group Arnhem, Arnhem, Netherlands
| | - Robert Geraghty
- Department of Urology, Freeman Hospital, Freeman Road, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, United Kingdom
| | - Stephen Griffin
- Department of Paediatric Urology, University Hospitals Southampton, NHS Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom
| | - Andreas Skolarikos
- Department of Urology, Sismanogleio Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - Christian Seitz
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Anna Bujons
- Department of Urology, Fundación Puigvert, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Seshadri Sriprasad
- Department of Urology, Darent Valley Hospital, Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust, Dartford, United Kingdom
| | - Subu Subramonian
- Department of Urology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Birmingham, Brimingham, United Kingdom
| | - Daron Smith
- Institute of Urology, University College Hospital London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Pablo Contreras
- Department of Urology, Hospital Alemán de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Norberto Bernardo
- Department of Urology, Hospital del Clinicas Jose de San Martin, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Francesco Esperto
- EAU Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group Arnhem, Arnhem, Netherlands
- Department of Urology, Campus Biomedico University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Esteban Emiliani
- EAU Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group Arnhem, Arnhem, Netherlands
- Department of Urology, Fundación Puigvert, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Vincent De Coninck
- EAU Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group Arnhem, Arnhem, Netherlands
- Department of Urology, AZ Klina, Brasschaat, Belgium
| | - Thomas Tailly
- EAU Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group Arnhem, Arnhem, Netherlands
- University Hospital Ghent, Department of Urology, Gent, Oost-Vlaanderen, Belgium
| | - Etienne X. Keller
- EAU Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group Arnhem, Arnhem, Netherlands
- Department of Urology, University hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Michele Talso
- EAU Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group Arnhem, Arnhem, Netherlands
- Department of Urology, ASST Fatebenefratelli Sacco, Luigi Sacco University Hospital, Milano, Italy
| | - Senol Tonyali
- EAU Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group Arnhem, Arnhem, Netherlands
- Department of Urology, Istanbul University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Emre T. Sener
- EAU Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group Arnhem, Arnhem, Netherlands
- Department of Urology, Marmara University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - BM Zeeshan Hameed
- EAU Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group Arnhem, Arnhem, Netherlands
- Department of Urology, Father Muller Medical College, Karnataka, India
| | - Lazaros Tzelves
- EAU Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group Arnhem, Arnhem, Netherlands
- Institute of Urology, University College Hospital London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Eugenio Ventimiglia
- EAU Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group Arnhem, Arnhem, Netherlands
- Division of Experimental Oncology, Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS, Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Patrick Juliebø-Jones
- EAU Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group Arnhem, Arnhem, Netherlands
- Department of Urology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | - Ioannis Mykoniatis
- EAU Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group Arnhem, Arnhem, Netherlands
- Department of Urology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece
| | - Arman Tsaturyan
- EAU Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group Arnhem, Arnhem, Netherlands
- Department of Urology, Erebouni Medical Center, Yerevan, Armenia
| | - Ewa Bres-Niewada
- Department of Urology, Roefler Memorial Hospital, Pruszków, Poland
- Faculty of Medicine, Łazarski University, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Bhaskar K. Somani
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom
- EAU Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group Arnhem, Arnhem, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Gao X, Fang Z, Lu C, Shen R, Dong H, Sun Y. Management of staghorn stones in special situations. Asian J Urol 2020; 7:130-138. [PMID: 32257806 PMCID: PMC7096693 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajur.2019.12.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/27/2019] [Revised: 08/05/2019] [Accepted: 10/18/2019] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Staghorn stones have always been a challenge for urologists, especially in some special situations, such as horseshoe kidney, ectopic kidney, paediatric kidney, and solitary kidney. The treatment of these staghorn stones must be aggressive because they can lead to renal function loss and serious complications. The gold-standard management for staghorn stones is surgical treatment with the aim of clearing the stones and preserving renal function. Treatment methods for staghorn stones have developed rapidly, such as extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, retrograde intrarenal surgery, percutaneous nephrolithotomy and laparoscopy and open surgery. Whether the standard procedures for staghorn stones can also apply to these stones in special situations is still not agreed upon. The decision should be made individually according to the circumstances of the patient. In this review, we evaluates the previous studies and comments on the management of staghorn stones under special situations in the hope of guiding the optimal choice for urologists.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xiaofeng Gao
- Department of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China
| | - Ziyu Fang
- Department of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China
| | - Chaoyue Lu
- Department of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China
| | - Rong Shen
- Department of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China
| | - Hao Dong
- Department of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China
| | - Yinghao Sun
- Department of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Pietropaolo A, Proietti S, Jones P, Rangarajan K, Aboumarzouk O, Giusti G, Somani BK. Trends of intervention for paediatric stone disease over the last two decades (2000-2015): A systematic review of literature. Arab J Urol 2017; 15:306-311. [PMID: 29234533 PMCID: PMC5717467 DOI: 10.1016/j.aju.2017.10.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2017] [Revised: 10/10/2017] [Accepted: 10/14/2017] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To ascertain the publication trends of interventions for paediatric kidney stone disease (KSD) we conducted a systematic review of literature over the last 16 years. PATIENTS AND METHODS With a rise of paediatric KSD and related interventions, a systematic review using PubMed was done over the last 16 years for all published papers on 'Paediatric stone disease intervention - ureteroscopy (URS), shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), open stone surgery, and laparoscopic stone surgery'. The search was limited to English language articles with a published abstract, whilst case reports, animal and laboratory studies, were excluded. We also analysed the data in two time periods, period-1 (2000-2007) and period-2 (2008-2015). RESULTS During the last 16-years, 339 papers were published on paediatric stone disease intervention on PubMed. This included papers on URS (95), PCNL (97), SWL (102), open stone surgery (34) and laparoscopic stone surgery (11). During period-1 and period-2 there were 30 and 65 papers on URS, 16 and 81 papers on PCNL, 33 and 60 papers on SWL, nine and 25 papers on open surgery, respectively. When comparing the two periods, there were 92 published papers for all interventions in period-1 and this had risen almost threefold to 247 papers in period-2. CONCLUSIONS Our systematic review shows that intervention for KSD in the paediatric age group has risen over the last 8 years. Whilst URS, SWL, open surgery and laparoscopic surgery have all doubled, PCNL has risen fivefold reflecting an increase in the new minimally invasive PCNL techniques.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Patrick Jones
- University Hospital Southampton NHS Trust, Southampton, UK
| | | | - Omar Aboumarzouk
- Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK
| | - Guido Giusti
- Raffaele Hospital, Ville Turro Division, Milan, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
El-Nahas AR, Shokeir AA, Shoma AM, Eraky I, Sarhan OM, Hafez AT, Dawaba MS, Elshal AM, Ghali AM, El-Kenawy MR. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus open surgery for treatment of staghorn stones in pediatric patients. Can Urol Assoc J 2015; 8:E906-9. [PMID: 25553164 DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.1994] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION We compare percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and open surgery in the treatment of staghorn stones in children. METHODS We retrospectively reviewed the electronic records of children who underwent treatment for staghorn stones between September 2000 and August 2013. They were divided between Group 1 (patients who underwent PCNL) and Group 2 (patients who underwent open surgery). We compared stone-free and complications rates, need for multiple procedures, and hospital stay. RESULTS The study included 41 patients (35 boys and 6 girls), with mean age 7.4 ± 3.1 years (range: 2-15). Of these 41 patients, 26 had unilateral renal stone and 15 had bilateral renal stones. The total number of treated renal units was 56: 28 underwent PCNL and 28 underwent open surgery. The complication rate was comparable for both groups (32% for open surgery vs. 28.6%, p = 0.771). Multiple procedures were more needed in PCNL group (60.7% vs. 32% in open surgery, p = 0.032). The stone-free rate was 71.4% after PCNL and 78.6% after open surgery (p = 0.537). A significant difference was observed in shorter hospital stay after PCNL (5 vs. 8.8 days, p < 0.001). Our study's limitations include its retrospective design and relatively small sample size. CONCLUSIONS For the treatment of staghorn stones in children, PCNL was comparable to open surgery in complication and stone-free rates. PCNL had the advantage of a shorter hospital stay and open surgery showed a decreased need for multiple procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Ahmed M Shoma
- Mansoura Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura, Egypt
| | - Ibrahim Eraky
- Mansoura Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura, Egypt
| | | | | | | | | | - Ahmed M Ghali
- Mansoura Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura, Egypt
| | | |
Collapse
|