Smallpox: a disease that disappeared.

H. Bloch

1984-05-01

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Comparison of safety and efficacy of laparoscopic pyelolithotomy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with large renal pelvic stones: a meta-analysis.

Xuefang Rui,Haiyi Hu,Yanlan Yu,Shicheng Yu,Zhigen Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jim-2015-000053

2016-01-01

Journal of Investigative Medicine

Abstract:To compare percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and laparoscopic pyelolithotomy (LP) for surgical management for large (>2cm) renal stones. We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases until March 11, 2015, using the following search terms: renalpelvic stone, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, laparoscopic pyelolithotomy. Randomized controlled and prospective and retrospective two-armed studies were included. Sensitivity analysis and assessment of the quality of the included studies and publication bias were performed. Nine studies were included in the study with a patient population of 622. The studies were homogeneous with respect to the primary end point of stone-free rate, but were heterogeneous with respect to operation time, length of hospital stay, and blood loss. A higher percentage of patients who received LP remained stone-free following surgery compared with patients who were treated with PCNL (p=0.001). However, the mean operation time was longer for patients with LP than for those treated with PCNL (p=0.002). There was no difference between procedures with regard to length of hospital stay or blood loss (p0.071). Sensitivity and quality analysis indicated that the data are reliable and the included studies are of good quality. No publication bias was observed. The study suggests that both procedures are effective and safe for removing large renal stones. However, LP may be more efficacious than PCNL in treating large kidney stones.
A randomized controlled study comparing the standard, tubeless, and totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures for renal stones from a tertiary care hospital

Suresh Bhat,Jithin Lal,Fredrick Paul

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/iju.IJU_52_17

Abstract:Introduction: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is an effective treatment for renal stones. Due to the significant pain and morbidity after standard PCNL because of nephrostomy tubes, various modifications of PCNL are being performed. We report a randomized trial comparing these modalities. Materials and methods: A total of 75 patients were randomized into three groups of 25 each: standard PCNL with nephrostomy tubes (Group 1), tubeless PCNL with ureteric stent and no nephrostomy (Group 2), and totally tubeless PCNL without ureteric catheter or nephrostomy (Group 3). Randomization was done at the end of the procedure for those patients satisfying the inclusion criteria based on duration of surgery, single puncture tract, intraoperative bleeding, stone burden, intact pelvicalyceal system, and no residual stones at the end of procedure. The outcomes measured were hemoglobin (Hb) drop, hemorrhage, need for blood transfusion, pyrexia, urine leak, pain score, analgesic requirement, and duration of hospital stay. Results: There was no significant difference in hemorrhage, Hb drop, need for blood transfusion, and postoperative pyrexia among the groups. All patients except one in the standard group only had variable amount of urinary leak. The analgesic requirement and duration of hospital stay attained statistical significance in favor of tubeless and totally tubeless groups compared to the standard. Conclusions: Tubeless and totally tubeless PCNL are safe and effective method of renal stone management. Totally tubeless PCNL significantly reduced postoperative pain and morbidity compared to the tubeless method.
Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Is a Noninferior Modality to Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for the Management of 20–40 mm Renal Calculi: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

Guohua Zeng,Chao Cai,Xianzhong Duan,Xun Xu,Houping Mao,Xuedong Li,Yong Nie,Jianjun Xie,Jiongming Li,Jun Lu,Xiaofeng Zou,Jianfeng Mo,Chengyang Li,Jianzhong Li,Weiguo Wang,Yonggang Yu,Xiang Fei,Xianen Gu,Jianhui Chen,Xiangbo Kong,Jian Pang,Wei Zhu,Zhijian Zhao,Wenqi Wu,Hongling Sun,Yongda Liu,Jean de la Rosette

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.026

IF: 24.267

2021-01-01

European Urology

Abstract:<h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Background</h3><p>High quality of evidence comparing mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPNL) with standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (sPNL) for the treatment of larger-sized renal stones is lacking.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Objective</h3><p>To compare the efficacy and safety of mPNL and sPNL for the treatment of 20–40 mm renal stones.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Design, setting, and participants</h3><p>A parallel, open-label, and noninferior randomized controlled trial was performed at 20 Chinese centers (2016–2019). The inclusion criteria were patients 18–70 yr old, with normal renal function, and 20–40 mm renal stones.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Intervention</h3><p>Percutaneous nephrolithotomy PNL was performed using either 18 F or 24 F percutaneous nephrostomy tracts.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Outcome measurements and statistical analysis</h3><p>The primary outcome was the one-session stone-free rate (SFR). The secondary outcomes included operating time, visual analog pain scale (VAS) score, blood loss, complications as per the Clavien-Dindo grading system, and length of hospitalization.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Results and limitations</h3><p>The 1980 intention-to-treat patients were randomized. The mPNL group achieved a noninferior one-session SFR to the sPNL group by the one-side noninferiority test (0.5% [difference], <em>p</em> <  0.001). The transfusion and embolization rates were comparable; however, the sPNL group had a higher hemoglobin drop (5.2 g/l, <em>p</em> <  0.001). The sPNL yielded shorter operating time (–2.2 min, <em>p</em> = 0.008) but a higher VAS score (0.8, <em>p</em> <  0.001). Patients in the sPNL group also had longer hospitalization (0.6 d, <em>p</em> <  0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in fever or urosepsis occurrences. The study's main limitation was that only 18F or 24F tract sizes were used.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Conclusions</h3><p>Mini mPNL achieves noninferior SFR outcomes to sPNL, but with reduced bleeding, less postoperative pain, and shorter hospitalization.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Patient summary</h3><p>We evaluated the surgical outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy using two different sizes of nephrostomy tracts in a large population. We found that the smaller tract might be a sensible alternative for patients with 20–40 mm renal stones.</p>

urology & nephrology
A comparative study of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery for solitary renal stone of 1-2 cm

Mayank Jain,C S Manohar,M Nagabhushan,R Keshavamurthy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/UA.UA_10_20

Abstract:Background: PCNL is the treatment of choice for renal stones. But wide array of complications due to larger tract size(>20 Fr) has lead to development of improved techniques like miniPCNL(<20 Fr) and RIRS(Retrograde intrarenal surgery). Aim and objective: To perform a study comparing miniPCNL with RIRS for renal stones 1-2 cm with respect to stone free rate , complications and quality of life. Materials and methods: A prospective, randomised study was carried out our tertiary care centre, recruiting 40 patients in each group from Dec 2016 to Oct 2018. Patients demographic characteristics, operative findings, surgical outcomes and quality of life( SF-36 questionnaire) were recorded with 3 months of follow-up. Results: RIRS has longer operative time (69.75 min > 51.58 min; p=0.003), lesser radiation exposure (p=0.012), shorter hospital stay (p =0.15), lesser blood loss and lesser post operative pain on POD1 and POD2 (p =0.005, p=0.001 respectively). RIRS group patients sufferred more post op complications (p=0.03 )of which urosepsis was most common. Stone free rate is significantly better(p =0.003) in miniPCNL group on POD1 , while SFR's at 1 month (miniPCNL-90% and RIRS -85%) and 3 month (miniPCNL- 92.5% and RIRS -87.5%) was better in miniPCNL group, but statistically insignificant.On subgroup analysis SFR in lower pole calculus was better in miniPCNL group at 1month and 3 month (p=0.008). Second intervention for stone clearance was required in 3 patients of miniPCNL and 5 patients of RIRS, out of which 4 had lower pole stone.No significant differnce was found in quality of life in both groups at 1 month. Conclusion: MiniPCNL is a better treatment modality for higher single step stone free rate, shorter operative time and fewer postop complication. RIRS has SFR slightly less than miniPCNL but has less radiation exposure and much less post operative pain. There is no significant difference in quality of life in both groups.
New Synthetic Technology for the Rapid Construction of Novel Heterocycles-Part 1: The Reaction of Dess - Martin Periodinane with Anilides and Related Compounds.

K. Nicolaou,Y. Zhong,P. Baran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1521-3773(20000204)39:3<622::AID-ANIE622>3.0.CO;2-B

2000-02-04

Angewandte Chemie

Abstract:The unusual behavior of hypervalent iodine reagents, Dess - Martin periodinane and IBX, with an array of anilides leads to the formation of complex heterocycles in only one synthetic operation (see scheme). Furthermore, the substrates for these transformations are available in one step from readily available commercial building blocks. The mechanism by which these periodinanes interact with anilides is also explored. This exciting new class of chemical reactions was discovered during the course of the total synthesis of the CP molecules and leads to compounds which are relevant to chemical biology investigations and pharmaceutical research.
Mini-percutaneous Nephrolithotomy vs Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Renal Stones Larger Than 10 mm: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Jeong Woo Lee,Juhyun Park,Seung Bae Lee,Hwancheol Son,Sung Yong Cho,Hyeon Jeong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.08.011

IF: 2.633

2015-11-01

Urology

Abstract:OBJECTIVE: To compare miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in the management of renal stones >10 mm in a single session.METHODS: Seventy patients presenting with renal stones >10 mm were randomized to a mini-PCNL or an RIRS group in a ratio of 1:1. Randomization was performed by a biostatistician and opened to the surgeon at the time of the patient's admission on the day before surgery. Patient and stone characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and complications were compared between the 2 groups. The primary end point of "stone-free" which was defined as no residual stone or stones <2 mm on computed tomography within 3 months postoperatively.RESULTS: Thirty-five patients (mini-PCNL) and 33 (RIRS) were included in the final analysis. Mini-PCNL and RIRS had a stone-free rate of 85.7% and 97.0%, respectively (P = .199). Operation time (P = .148), hemoglobin decline (P = .323), and hospital stay (P = .728) were similar between the 2 groups. Pain visual analog score at 1 hour postoperatively (P = .029) and analgesic requirement (P = .050) were higher in the RIRS group. Two patients in the mini-PCNL group and 1 in the RIRS group had minor pelvic or ureter perforation. One patient in each of the 2 groups had hypertension and urinary tract infection.CONCLUSION: Mini-PCNL and RIRS are safe and feasible surgical options to manage renal stones >10 mm. RIRS produced a slightly higher stone-free rate, but more immediate postoperative pain and higher analgesic requirement compared with mini-PCNL.

urology & nephrology
The efficacy and safety of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Dechao Feng,Xiao Hu,Yin Tang,Ping Han,Xin Wei

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.2020.61.2.115

2020-01-01

Investigative and Clinical Urology

Abstract:Purpose: Our aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) versus standard PCNL (sPCNL) to provide higher-level evidence.Materials and Methods: Eligible randomized controlled trials were identified from electronic databases. The data analysis was performed by the Cochrane Collaboration's software RevMan 5.3.Results: A total of 1,219 patients from 9 articles published between 2004 and 2019 were included. Compared with those who received sPCNL, patients who received mPCNL experienced a higher stone-free rate (SFR) (odds ratio [OR], 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.99; p=0.03), lower transfusion rates (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.17-0.63; p=0.0007), and lower drops in hemoglobin (mean difference [MD], -0.72; 95% CI, -1.04 to -0.40; p<0.00001), but the operative time seemed to be significantly longer (MD, 10.98; 95% CI, 3.64-18.32; p=0.003). Of note, there was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the SFR (p=0.09) for renal calculi ≥2 cm. In addition, the meta-analysis results showed no significant differences between the groups regarding urine leakage (p=0.60), postoperative fever (p=0.71), impaired ventilation (p=0.97), or total complications (p=0.29) with no heterogeneity between trials. These results remain unaffected with regard to renal calculi ≥2 cm.Conclusions: Our findings suggested that mPCNL had a higher SFR than sPCNL and there was no significant difference between the two groups for renal stones ≥2 cm. Besides, mPCNL tended to be associated with significantly less bleeding and a lower transfusion rate, but the duration of the procedure seemed to be significantly longer.

urology & nephrology
Comparative Analysis of Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (Mini-PCNL) for Renal Stones Larger Than 2 cm at a Rural Hospital: A Study Protocol

Ghanshyam Hatwar,Abhijit Dhale,Jay D Dharamshi,Ruturaj Pendkar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.61963

2024-06-08

Cureus

Abstract:Background Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is considered a standard treatment option for large-size renal stones but is associated with drawbacks such as bleeding and prolonged recovery. Mini-PCNL offers a less invasive alternative, but its efficacy compared to standard PCNL for renal stones larger than 2 cm remains under debate. This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of standard PCNL versus mini-PCNL for renal stone sizes more than 2 cm. Methods This single-centre prospective interventional study will be conducted at Acharya Vinoba Bhave Rural Hospital (AVBRH). The study will include patients 18 to 70 years of age undergoing unilateral PCNL for renal calculi. Patients with renal stones larger than 2 cm will be enrolled. Data on stone-free rate (SFR), operative duration, hospital stay time, surgical site infection, haemoglobin (Hb) drop, need for blood transfusion, and post-surgery fever will be collected and compared between the two procedures. Statistical analysis of data will be performed using descriptive and analytical statistics. Results The study aims to enrol a total of 32 patients. Data analysis will be done using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 24 (Released 2016; IBM Corp., Armonk, New York). Conclusion This study will provide valuable insights into the comparative outcome in terms of efficacy and safety of standard PCNL and mini-PCNL for kidney stones larger than 2 cm.
Impact of Miniaturization on Early Outcome of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy

Mahesh Bahadur Adhikari,Sumeet Karna,Kinju Adhikari,Atul Kasaju,Jagdish Lal Baidya

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33314/jnhrc.v17i3.1593

2019-11-13

Abstract:Background: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy has become the standard procedure for large renal stones but still remains highly challenging due to complications such as bleeding and sepsis, even though it has high stone free rate (SFR). We report the early outcomes of more than 1000 percutaneous nephrolithotomys done in our center. Methods: A retrospective study of all patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy from January 2010 to December 2017 in single institution was conducted. All cases were stratified into three groups based on tract size; standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy with tract size ? 22 F, mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy with tract size 15 - 20 F and ultramini percutaneous nephrolithotomy with tract size ? 14 F. Age, gender, stone complexity using Guy's stone score, stone size, operative time, hemoglobin drop, hospital stay, early major and minor complications were reviewed. Results: A total of 1074 patients had undergone percutaneous nephrolithotomy among which, 578 patients were standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy, 433 mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy and 63 had undergone ultramini percutaneous nephrolithotomy. There was even distribution of patients with Guy's stone score 1 and 2 in all three groups. However, majority of patients with Guy's stone score 3 underwent standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy or mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy and no patients with Guy's stone score 4 underwent ultramini percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Age group, gender and operative time were comparable between the groups; however, significant difference was noted in terms of less hemoglobin drop and shorter hospital stay (p-value < 0.05) in the miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy group. Complications were found to be fewer in mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy and ultramini percutaneous nephrolithotomy group in comparison to standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Conclusions: Miniaturization of tract size significantly decreases post-operative complication rates, blood loss and hospital stay while maintaining high stone free rates in well selected patients undergoing Percutaneous nephrolithotomy.
Outcomes in Lower Pole Kidney Stone Management Using Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Compared With Retrograde Intra Renal Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Obaid Ur Rehman,Momal Imran,Mudessar Rafaqat,Fayyaz Ur Rahman Haider,Aveena Rehman,Umer Farooq,Shabbar H Changazi,Fazal Ur Rehman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.35343

2023-02-23

Cureus

Abstract:Background Because of the anatomical properties of the inferior calyx, lower pole stones are difficult to remove through the ureter, even if the stones are fragmented. Retrograde intra-renal surgery (RIRS) is typically employed to treat the smaller lower pole stones (1.0-2.0 cm) while percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is primarily used to treat the larger diameter stones or when RIRS has failed to clear the stones. This study was conducted to compare mini-PCNL and RIRS for the management of lower pole kidney stones in terms of stone clearance. Material and methods This randomized control trial was conducted in the Department of Urology, Shaikh Zayed Hospital, Lahore from October 2020 to December 2022. A total of 150 patients between the ages of 18 and 80 years with a kidney stone size of 10-20 mm at the lower pole were included. Patients with positive urine culture, anatomical abnormalities, uncontrolled diabetes (hemoglobin{Hb}A1c >9%), and undergone previous renal surgery were excluded. Group A patients were treated with mini-PCNL, while group B patients were managed with RIRS. Follow-up visits were planned four weeks postoperatively with CT KUB (computed tomography of kidneys, ureters, and bladder) plain to assess stone clearance. Results The mean age in group A was 43.27 ± 13.86 years, while in group B was 45.32 ± 14.14 years. Out of 150 patients, 102 (68.0%) were males and 48 (32.0%) were females. Mean size of the stone was 15.30 ± 2.21 mm. Stone clearance after mini-PCNL was found in 69 (92.0%) patients and after RIRS in 59 (78.67%) patients (p-value = 0.021). Mean hospital stay after RIRS was 1.1 ± 0.09 days, while it was 2.3 ± 0.64 days after mini-PCNL (p-value < 0.001). Two (2.67%) patients in the mini-PCNL group developed bleeding postoperatively. The stone clearance rate in older patients (51 to 80 years) was significantly higher in the mini-PCNL group than RIRS group. Similarly, the stone clearance rate in female patients and in patients with larger stones (16 to 20 mm) was found to be higher in mini-PCNL group as compared to the RIRS group. Conclusion This study concluded that both mini-PCNL and RIRS are safe and efficient techniques for treating lower pole kidney stones with a size of 11-15 mm. However, mini-PCNL has a higher stone clearance rate compared to RIRS in the treatment of stones larger than 15 mm in size. This study further suggested that patients treated with mini-PCNL had a longer hospital stay compared to patients treated with RIRS.
Comparison of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery for 1-2 cm renal stones: A single-center experience.

Habibullah Muhammad Akber,Osama Kalim Shaikh,Muhammad Saleem,Shakeel Haseeb Uddin Siddiqui,Salman El Khalid,Wajahat Fareed

DOI: https://doi.org/10.29052/ijehsr.v11.i4.2023.212-218

2023-11-18

Abstract:Background: The management of renal stones has undergone significant advancements in recent years, with percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery (RIRS) emerging as minimally invasive alternatives to traditional Pyelolithotomy. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of Mini-PCNL and RIRS for renal stones measuring 1-2 cm, focusing on operative time, stone clearance, hospital stay, and the need for ancillary procedures. Methodology: This retrospective study collected data from the medical records of patients admitted to The Department of Urology at The Kidney Centre, Karachi, between January 1, 2021, and August 31, 2022. The study included 100 patients who underwent RIRS and 129 patients who underwent Mini-PCNL. Results: It was found that the operative time was statistically similar in both groups. However, the length of hospital stay was significantly higher in the Mini-PCNL group (more than 2 days in 88.4%), whereas in the RIRS group, the majority of patients stayed ≤ 2 days (78%). Overall stone clearance was 82.1%, with a slightly higher clearance rate in patients who underwent Mini-PCNL (85.3%) compared to RIRS (78%), though the p-value was not statistically significant. Conclusion: For renal stones sized 1-2 cm, both RIRS and Mini-PCNL demonstrate efficient treatment options with comparable stone-free rates. RIRS appears more comfortable and less morbid than Mini-PCNL, with a shorter hospital stay. Although Mini-PCNL requires an extended hospital stay to treat 1- to 2-cm renal stones, it is associated with fewer complications and a reduced need for a JJ stent, making it a viable alternative to RIRS in certain cases.
Comparison of two percutaneous nephrolithotomy methods for the treatment of pediatric kidney stones: mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Kadir Karkin,Mubariz Aydamirov,Buğra Aksay,Eyüp Kaplan,Güçlü Gürlen,Adem Altunkol,Ferhat Ortaoğlu,Ömer Faruk Akgün,Ediz Vuruşkan,Zafer Gökhan Gürbüz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2024.12369

2024-05-06

Abstract:Objective: In this study, the aim was to compare the results of mini and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for the treatment of pediatric kidney stones. Materials and methods: Data for 128 patients < 18 years of age who underwent mini and standard PCNL due to pediatric kidney stones were retrospectively examined. Patients were divided into two groups: mini-PCNL (16-20 Fr) and standard PCNL (26 Fr). Surgery time, number of punctures to the pelvicalyceal system, hospital stay, postoperative hemoglobin drop, complications and stone-free status (SFR) were compared between the groups. Additional surgical intervention (double-J stent, ureterorenoscopy, secondary PCNL) performed after the surgery was recorded. The absence of residual stones or < 3 mm residual stones on kidney, ureter and bladder radiography (KUB) and ultrasonography (USG) performed in the third postoperative month were accepted as success criteria. Results: There were 32 (43.8%) patients in the mini-PCNL group and 41 (56.2%) patients in the standard PCNL group. The mean age was 9.3 ± 4.1 years in the mini-PCNL group and 10.1 ± 5.4 years in the standard PCNL group. Mean stone size in the mini-PCNL group was 2.1 ± 1.2; while for standard PCNL it was 2.3 ± 1.4. The mean surgery time was statistically significantly higher in the mini-PCNL group (p = 0.005). There was no difference between the groups in terms of intraoperative double J stent use, postoperative complications and SFR. A double J stent was inserted in two patients in the mini-PCNL group and in one patient in the standard PCNL group due to urine leakage from the nephrostomy tract in the postoperative period. Although the postoperative hemoglobin drop was found to be significantly higher in standard PCNL (p = 0.001), hematuria and blood transfusion rates were low in both groups. Mean hospital stay was shorter in the mini-PCNL group compared to standard PCNL (3.6 ± 1.2 days vs. 2.5 ± 1.1; p = 0.018). Conclusions: Although mini-PCNL has longer surgery time compared to standard PCNL, it should be preferred for the treatment of pediatric kidney stones due to advantages such as similar success and complication rates to standard PCNL, short hospital stay and less postoperative hemoglobin drop.
Neutralizing and Complement-Fixing Antibodies for Japanese B Encephalitis Virus in Vaccinated U. S. Personnel in Japan

D. R. Ginder,M. Matumoto,R. Schlesinger,A. Sabin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3181/00379727-65-15889

1947-05-01

Abstract:Summary Commercial Japanese B encephalitis mouse brain vaccine was administered to the occupation forces in Japan in 1946 by the triple-dose method, and the antibody response was studied in a group of men who received the first 2 doses of 1 cc each 4 to 5 days apart and the 3rd dose of 1 cc one month after the first dose. The vaccine used for the first dose had a 50% im-munogenic dose (ID50) of 0.028 cc by mouse assay, which is considerably less than the minimal required potency of 0.01 cc, and the lot used for the other 2 doses just fulfilled the minimal requirements with an ID50 of 0.0094 cc. The results in 20 Americans, aged 19 to 35, who were stationed in Tokyo and were without antibody or previous history of having received1 this vaccine, were as follows: (a) 15% had neutralizing antibodies 10 days after the 2nd dose, and 45% 10 days after the 3rd dose. (b) Only 2 men (10%) developed specific complement-fixing antibodies for the Japanese B virus, which appeared after the 2nd dose of vaccine. (c) Complement-fixing antibodies for the mouse brain component of the vaccine appeared in original serum dilutions of 1:2 to 1:4 in 35% after the 2nd dose and in 45% after the 3rd dose of vaccine. The antibody response in this group of Americans in Japan, vaccinated by the triple-dose method with commercial preparations, which either just fulfilled or were below the ID50 of 0.01 cc which is the minimal requirement of potency, was about the same after the 3rd dose as that previously obtained after the 2nd dose in a group of 25 Americans, of similar age in the U.S.A., who received 2 doses of 2 cc each, 3 days apart, of a freshly prepared vaccine with an ID50 of 0.0055 cc.
A randomized controlled trial comparing infectious complications using mini perc with and without suction for renal stones less than 3 cm in size

Niramya Pathak,Sahil Agrawal,Aditya Parikh,Nitiraj Shete,Abhishek Singh,Arvind Ganpule,Ravindra Sabnis,Mahesh Desai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-023-01487-7

2023-11-22

Urolithiasis

Abstract:The purpose was to do a study to compare infectious complications in patients operated for MiniPerc or Minimally invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) using MIP and MPCNL with suction using Shah Superperc sheath for medium-sized renal stones less than 3 cm in size. The primary objective of this study is to compare the infectious complications and the secondary objectives are to compare stone-free rates, complication rates and operative times. A prospective randomized controlled trial with patients having proximal ureteral and renal stones of 10-30 mm size and planned for MPCNL done at a single institute. A total of 80 consecutively admitted patients with written informed consent were included for randomization with 40 patients in each arm of MPCNL and suction MPCNL. The median age in MPCNL and suction MPCNL arms were 48 and 49 years, the median stone size of 15.45 and 16.7 cm, the Median stone volume of 1576.2 vs 1752 mm3, and the median stone density of 1258 and 1250 Hu, the median hospital stay of 3 days in both arms were comparable. Infectious complications were comparable in both arms. Operative time was significantly less in the suction MPCNL group (26.5 min-IQR 17-34.8) than in the MPCNL group (34.8 min-IQR 20-45), p = 0.021 and stone-free rates (SFR), were more in Suction MPCNL arm 97.5% than in MPCNL 87.5%, p = 0.04. Overall, the complication rates were comparable in both arms. Suction MPCNL procedure resulted in shorter operating times and more SFR than conventional MPCNL with comparable complication rates.
Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Versus Endoscopic Combined Intrarenal Surgery with Flexible Ureteroscope for Partial Staghorn Calculi: A Randomised Controlled Trial

Jiaming Wen,Gang Xu,Chuanjun Du,Bohan Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.02.056

2016-01-01

International Journal of Surgery

Abstract:Background: To compare the efficacy and safety of simultaneous percutaneous nephrolithotomy combined with flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy in Galdakao-Modified Supine Valdivia position (GMSV) with minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) for partial staghorn calculi. Methods: 67 patients with partial staghorn calculi were randomly divided into two groups. In MPCNL Group, conventional MPCNL was performed in the prone position. In the other group, simultaneous combined MPCNL and flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (Endoscopic Combined Intra-Renal Surgery, ECIRS) serves as single session treatment in the GMSV position (ECIRS Group). Demographic, clinical characteristic, perioperative complications and stone free rate (SFR) were recorded. Results: No significant difference was detected between two groups concerning the age, body mass index, hydronephrosis, stone burden and location. The mean operative time was 105.33 +/- 30.28 min in ECIRS group, which is longer (p = 0.002) than MPCNL group (83.58 +/- 24.37 min). The one-step SFR was significantly higher (p = 0.007) in the ECIRS group compared to MPCNL group (87.88% vs 58.82%). The mean blood loss was 77.21 +/- 41.21 ml for ECIRS group and 86.43 +/- 35.61 ml for MPCNL group (p = 0.330). Overall, complication rate is low in both groups. No statistical difference was found in regards to the clinical complications between the two groups (p = 0.409). After the ancillary treatments, the final SFR was 96.97% in ECIRS group and 91.18% in MPCNL group (p = 0.628). Conclusion: Simultaneous combined MPCNL and flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy is an effective and safe treatment for partial staghorn calculi, with significantly higher one-step SFR when compared to conventional MPCNL monotherapy, without additional procedure-related complications. (C) 2016 IJS Publishing Group Limited. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Construction of Photo Realistic Virtual Space Based on Ray Information of Real World

T. Naemura,M. Kaneko,H. Harashima

Abstract:: This paper presents a new method for constructing virtual space and synthesizing virtual views by introducing the concept of Ray-Space which has been proposed as a neutral description of 3-D images. In order to synthesize dense Ray-Space from sparsely sampled ray information of real world, disparities between views are estimated. In this paper, many structural models resulted from disparity estimation at each view are adaptively stitched to interpolate ray information. Our approach can avoid the diﬃculty in estimating a unique structural model of real world. The experimental results show how the method could be applied to the next-generation virtual reality system.
Comparison of standard versus minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of calculi less than 2 cm

SITU Jie,NA Ning,HU Cheng,GAO Xin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0785.2011.18.003

2011-01-01

Abstract:Objective To evaluate the safety and efficacy of two kinds of percutaneous nephrolithotomy,standard(24～30 F)versus minimally invasive(16～18 F)in the treatment of calculi less than 2 cm.Methods There were 69 patients with renal calculi less than 2 cm in our study.They were divided into two groups.28 cases in Group standard(standard PCNL) which passages were dilated with Amplaz dilators to 24 F,and other 41 cases in Group minimally invasive (MPCNL)were treated with a trocar of 18F.Data were collected,including the operation time,blood loss,etc.Results There were no significant difference in ages and the sizes of the calculi between two groups.All the cases were successful,and no severe complications occurred.The operation time of standard PCNL was (122.52±41.39)min and the MPCNL was (111.6±36.59) min.The concentration of haematoglobin decreased in Group standard PCNL was (21.52±19.91)g/L,and Group MPCNL was (12.24±17.09)g/L.Two groups had no significant difference.Conclusions The differences of safty and efficacy between standard PCNL and MPCNL are not significant,but the blood loss in MPCNL seem to be more stabile.
Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Versus Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery in Patients with Renal Stones

Muhammad Maqsood Zahid,Khalid Farook,Khaleel Ahmad,Liaquat Ali,Hafiz Muhammad Javed,Syed Mehmood ul Hassan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.54393/pbmj.v5i7.650

2022-07-31

Pakistan BioMedical Journal

Abstract:Kidney stones, also known as renal calculi, are crystal concretions that primarily occur in the kidney and are referred to as nephrolithiasis. Ideally, calculi should form in the kidneys and pass out of the body through the urethra painlessly. Larger stones are uncomfortable and thus require surgery. Mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) are the minimally invasive procedures employed these days to target renal stones. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of both mini-PCNL and RIRS in terms of targeting larger stones in adult patients along with other factors including hospital stay, operative time, stone passing rate and associated complications. Patients and Methods: In the year 2021, 101 patients undergoing mini-PCNL or RIRS in Doctors Hospital, Gujrat were observed in this study. Effectiveness of both the techniques, exposure time, transfusions required, stone free rates and hospital stay were compared in both groups of patients. Results: It was found that mini-PCNL has greater potential than RIRS in terms of stone clearing and operating time. However, RIRS has performed better in terms of reducing the hospital stay with mild complications in both the procedures. Conclusion: Both RIRS and mini-PCNL are extremely safe and highly efficient treatments for renal lithiasis with a diameter of 1.5 to 2.5 cm, and either one can be chosen to achieve outstanding stone-free rates.
Intraoperative Complications Are Significantly Less in Pcnl in the Treatment of Large Renal Calculi : A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Syed Alfasani,Zamanul Islam Bhuiyan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3329/bju.v17i2.49154

2020-09-15

Bangladesh Journal of Urology

Abstract:Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and open surgery in the treatment of patients having large kidney stone(>2 cm ). Materials & Methods: A Randomised controlled clinical trial (RCT ) of 80 patients diagnosed with kidney stone disease admitted in the NIKDU during the period of Jan’ to Dec’2009 were divided conveniently into two groups. Intervention was done in the form PCNL(40) and open surgery (40). Clinical outcome like, peroperativecomplications,durationof surgery,mean hospital stay,convalescence period, amount of analgesia required to relief pain, stone clearance rate were reviewed and compared between the groups. There was no significant difference in preoperative variables such as age,sex, stone size in cm, stone number- single/multiple and stag horn Stone. Results: There were statistically significant difference in the parameters between the groups,( PCNL vs open surgery [mean ± SD]): duration of operation (min), 97.90 ± 24.89 vs 136.62 ± 23.54, postoperative hospital stay (days) ,4.77 ± 3.98 vs 9.55 ± 3.65, mean time return to work (days) , 3.09 ± 1.21vs 6.25 ± 1.53, ( p value is <0.001). Intraoperative complications like bleeding requiring blood transfusion are significantly lower in PCNL (11 cases 34.1%) than in open surgery( 18 cases 45.0%), (Chi-square = 4.82; p = 0.049). Conclusion: PCNL is relatively safe & better treatment option than open surgery in the treatment of large renal calculi, It has definite advantages of statistically less peroperative bleeding and lower morbidity. Bangladesh Journal of Urology, Vol. 17, No. 2, July 2014 p.71-74
Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs standard PCNL for management of renal stones in the flank-free modified supine position: single-center experience

Ahmed Sakr,Emad Salem,Mostafa Kamel,Esam Desoky,Ahmed Ragab,Mohamed Omran,Amr Fawzi,Ashraf Shahin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-017-0966-1

2017-02-22

Urolithiasis

Abstract:To assess the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) as compared to standard PCNL (sPCNL) for management of 2–3-cm renal stones in the flank-free modified supine position. Between September 2010 and December 2013, 150 patients (168 renal units) with 2–3-cm renal stones were prospectively randomized into two treatment groups; Group A (75 patients/87 renal units) treated by mPCNL and Group B (75 patients/81 renal units) treated by sPCNL. In both groups, the patients were placed in the flank-free modified supine position. In mPCNL group, the tract was dilated up to 16.5 F whereas in sPCNL group the tract was dilated up to 30 F. Both groups were compared regarding several perioperative parameters. No significant difference was recorded among both groups regarding fluoroscopy time (4.3 ± 1.3 vs 4.8 ± 2.1 min, p = 0.06), operative time (83.2 ± 17.3 vs 78.6 ± 24.4 min, p = 0.16), hospital stay (4.3 vs 4.5 days, p = 0.76), VAS score (3.2 ± 0.6 vs 3.3 ± 0.8, p = 0.36) and need for analgesia. The mean drop in hemoglobin level and the incidence of bleeding that necessitated blood transfusion were significantly lower in the mPCNL group (0.6 ± 0.1 vs 1.9 ± 1.1 g/dl, p < 0.0001 and 1.2 vs 9.8%, p = 0.03, respectively). Although the stone-free rate was higher in the sPCNL group, but this was statistically insignificant (97.1 vs 95.4%, p = 0.86). Mini-PCNL is effective for managing renal calculi with comparable operative time and stone-free rate to standard PCNL with the merit of higher safety due to lower incidence of bleeding that necessitates blood transfusion.

urology & nephrology

Smallpox: a disease that disappeared.

Comparison of safety and efficacy of laparoscopic pyelolithotomy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with large renal pelvic stones: a meta-analysis.

A randomized controlled study comparing the standard, tubeless, and totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures for renal stones from a tertiary care hospital

Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Is a Noninferior Modality to Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for the Management of 20–40 mm Renal Calculi: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

A comparative study of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery for solitary renal stone of 1-2 cm

New Synthetic Technology for the Rapid Construction of Novel Heterocycles-Part 1: The Reaction of Dess - Martin Periodinane with Anilides and Related Compounds.

Mini-percutaneous Nephrolithotomy vs Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Renal Stones Larger Than 10 mm: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

The efficacy and safety of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Comparative Analysis of Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (Mini-PCNL) for Renal Stones Larger Than 2 cm at a Rural Hospital: A Study Protocol

Impact of Miniaturization on Early Outcome of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy

Outcomes in Lower Pole Kidney Stone Management Using Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Compared With Retrograde Intra Renal Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Comparison of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery for 1-2 cm renal stones: A single-center experience.

Comparison of two percutaneous nephrolithotomy methods for the treatment of pediatric kidney stones: mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Neutralizing and Complement-Fixing Antibodies for Japanese B Encephalitis Virus in Vaccinated U. S. Personnel in Japan

A randomized controlled trial comparing infectious complications using mini perc with and without suction for renal stones less than 3 cm in size

Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Versus Endoscopic Combined Intrarenal Surgery with Flexible Ureteroscope for Partial Staghorn Calculi: A Randomised Controlled Trial

Construction of Photo Realistic Virtual Space Based on Ray Information of Real World

Comparison of standard versus minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of calculi less than 2 cm

Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Versus Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery in Patients with Renal Stones

Intraoperative Complications Are Significantly Less in Pcnl in the Treatment of Large Renal Calculi : A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs standard PCNL for management of renal stones in the flank-free modified supine position: single-center experience