Supine Versus Prone Position in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Kidney Calculi: a Meta-Analysis.

Peng Wu,Li Wang,Kunjie Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-010-9801-0

IF: 2.2662

2010-01-01

International Urology and Nephrology

Abstract:Supine position and prone position were the choice for percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). However, there is still no consensus on the optimal position for PCNL.

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.
Is the supine position superior to the prone position for percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL)?

Xiaohua Zhang,Leilei Xia,Tianyuan Xu,Xianjin Wang,Shan Zhong,Zhoujun Shen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-013-0614-3

2013-01-01

Urolithiasis

Abstract:The objective of this study is to update the two previous meta-analyses in order to evaluate the efficacy and safety of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for patients in the prone position versus supine position. An electronic database search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, google scholar, and the Cochrane library was performed up to June, 2013. All studies comparing prone with supine position for PCNL were included. The outcome measures were stone-free rate, operative time, complication and hospital stay. Two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 7 non-RCTs, including 6,413 patients (4,956 patients in the prone position group and 1,457 patients in the supine position group), met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of extractable data showed that PCNL in the supine position was associated with a significantly shorter operative time (WMD: 21.7; 95 % CI 2.46–40.94; p = 0.03) but lower stone-free rate (OR: 1.36; 95 % CI 1.19–1.56; p < 0.0001) than PCNL in the prone position. There was no difference between the two positions regarding hospital stay (WMD = 0.05; 95 % CI −0.16–0.25; p = 0.66) and complication rate (OR: 1.1; 95 % CI 0.94–1.28; p = 0.24). In conclusion, the present study found different results from the two previous meta-analyses results regarding stone-free rate; PCNL in the supine position had a significantly lower stone-free rate than that in prone position.
Prone Versus Modified Supine Position In Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Prospective Randomized Study

Yanbo Wang,Yan Wang,Yunming Yao,Ning Xu,Haifeng Zhang,Qihui Chen,Zhihua Lu,Jinghai Hu,Xiaoqing Wang,Ji Lu,Yuanyuan Hao,Fengming Jiang,Yuchuan Hou,Chunxi Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7150/ijms.6305

2013-01-01

International Journal of Medical Sciences

Abstract:Objective: To perform a prospective randomized trial comparing the efficacy and safety of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in the prone and modified supine positions.Methods: Between August 2010 and August 2011, 102 patients with renal calculi and 20 patients with ureteral calculi were randomized to undergo fluoroscopy and ultrasound-guided PCNL procedures in the prone or modified supine position. Baseline characteristics, puncture position, numbers of punctures, operation time, stone free rate, loss of blood, hospital stay and second phase PCNL were compared in the two groups.Results: There were no significant differences in gender, age, body mass index, stone location, stone size and the presence of hydronephrosis between the two groups. The rate of second PCNL was significantly higher and the stone clearance rate was significantly lower in the modified supine than in the prone position group. Mean operation time was significantly lower in the prone than in the modified supine position group (78 min vs 88 min, P<0.05). There were no significant differences in rates of rib and calyx puncture, numbers of punctures, mean blood loss, and mean hospital stay between the two groups.Conclusions: Both the prone and modified supine positions are effective and safe for PCNL. Operation time was longer in the modified supine group, and patients undergoing PCNL in the modified supine position more frequently required a second operation due to a lower stone clearance rate.
Supine Versus Prone Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL): A Single Surgeon's Experience

Deerush Kannan,Mohsin Quadri,Praveen G Sekaran,Rajesh Paul,Aarthy Panneerselvam,Nitesh Jain

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.41944

2023-07-16

Cureus

Abstract:Introduction: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is one of the greatest advances in the field of urology and has been considered the gold standard in the treatment of renal calculi of more than 2 cm in size. While both the supine and prone positions offer their unique advantages, it is still being debated which position offers the most in terms of surgical outcomes. We have evaluated the two approaches in terms of operative time, success rate, stone clearance rate, safety, and complications. Methods: This prospective cohort study was done in the urology department of a tertiary care center in South India between January 2018 and October 2020. A total of 166 patients, with 83 in supine and 83 in prone positions, were included in the study. Results: Both groups were matched in terms of age, body mass index, stone size and location, co-morbidities, medications taken, presence of diverticular stone, history of surgery, and baseline creatinine level. Mean operative time and pain scores were noted to be less in supine position as compared to prone. Ease of puncture was superior in supine position. Stone residue was noted to be higher in supine PCNL as well. Conclusion: Supine PCNLs are preferred in high-risk patients while the prone position is preferred in bilateral PCNLs, complex anatomy, or larger stone burden.
Supine versus prone pediatric percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Mohamed Ramez,Esam A E Desoky,Ahmed R El-Nahas

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/20905998.2024.2362462

2024-06-03

Abstract:Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the treatment of choice for pediatric nephrolithiasis more than 20 mm. Prone position was the preferred position for decades. Recently, supine position has gained more interest. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of PCNL in supine versus prone position in pediatric population. A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library was performed till 28 February 2024. The study included comparative studies comparing both positions in children that were written in English. A total of three randomized studies and three retrospective studies were included with a total number of 290 patients. Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials was used for quality assessment, while Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used for non-randomized controlled trials. The meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager software. Numerical data were analyzed using standardized mean difference (SMD), while the risk ratio was used for analysis of categorical data. Fixed or random effects models were used according to heterogeneity. There were statistically insignificant differences between both groups for stone-free rate (RR 1.08, 95% CI [0.98-1.18], p = 0.11) and overall complications (RR 0.93, 95% CI [0.59-1.47], p = 0.76). Operation time was significantly shorter in supine group (SMD -0.99, 95% CI [-1.67 to -0.30], p = 0.005). Therefore, comparable efficacy and safety outcomes were proved between both supine and prone positions for PCNL in pediatrics.
Systematic review and meta-analysis of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in flank versus prone position

Qing He,Liqiang Xiong,Renbo Wei,Lei Fu,Liang Zhou,Renbin Yuan,Hui Zhuo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-024-01544-2

2024-07-29

Abstract:Background: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficiency and safety of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) between flank position and prone position for the treatment of renal stones. Methods: PubMed, Embase, OVID, and Cochrane Library were comprehensively searched from their inception to Jul 2024. Randomized and nonrandomized trials evaluating renal calculi patients who underwent PCNL via flank position or prone position were included. Data extraction and quality assessment were conducted by two independent reviewers. The outcomes and complications of both groups were compared in this meta-analysis. Results: This review involved five articles (554 patients). Specifically, four articles were randomized controlled trials, and the remaining publication was prospective cohort study. No significant difference was found in stone-free rate between the flank group and prone group after the PCNL procedure. Similarly, the percutaneous access time, operative time, and hospital stay of flank position had no significant difference compared with the prone group. There was no significant difference in the comparison of complication rates between the flank group and the prone group. Although further analysis indicated that patients in the prone position suffered more hemoglobin drop than the flank group, no significant difference was found in the hemorrhage and blood transfusion rates. Conclusions: Both surgical positions were appropriate for most PCNL procedures and had shown similar efficacy and safety. In practice, the optimal choice should be made according to the patients' conditions and urologists' acquaintance.
A meta analysis of the lateral decubitus position and prone position percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Du Yuan-Yao,Cheng Shao-Ping,Yuan Chang-Sheng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-024-01583-9

2024-09-14

Abstract:Objective To analyzed the safety and efficacy of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in lateral decubitus position and prone position for upper ureteral calculi. Methods Databases including PubMed, Springer, ScienceDirect, Wiley Online Library, CNKI, CSPD and VIP were searched for clinical controlled studies involved with lateral decubitus position and prone position PCNL from their establishment to November 2023.Studies were enrolled according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. the dates were compared by Review Manager 5.4 software. Results seven studies were eligible, including 807 cases. The Meta-analysis showed that, blood loss and perioperative complication rate of lateral decubitus position PCNL group were significantly different from those of the prone position PCNL group (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding hospital time, operative time, channel establishment time and stone-free rate (P>0.05).Conclusions The lateral decubitus position can reduce blood loss and perioperative complication rate. The lateral decubitus position PCNL is safe and effective for upper ureteral calculi which was deserved clinical popularizing use.
Prospective Comparative Analysis of Supine Versus Prone Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Patients with Complex Renal Stone Disease and Difficult Anatomy

Sunirmal Choudhury,Prakhar Patel,Gourab Kundu,Shahbaaz Ahmed,Malay Kumar Bera

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2024.24010

Abstract:Objective: In complex renal stone disease, few studies have shown that supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is not inferior to prone PCNL. In our study, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of supine versus prone PCNL in patients with complex renal stone disease and patients with difficult anatomy. Methods: We prospectively analyzed 106 patients over 15 months from October 2022 to December 2023 and divided them as group S (Calcutta position supine arm) and group P (classical prone arm) by simple randomization. The measured data included body mass index (BMI), stone size, location of stone, number of punctures/ access, tract length, bleeding, operative time, stone-free rate (SFR), length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications. Results: The operative time was 104.722 ± (34.48) versus 124.30 ± (22.67) minutes (group S vs. group P), which was significant (P=.01). The nephroscopy time was 89.722 ± 34.55 in group S vs. 92.212 ± 20.18 minutes, which was also significant (P = .01). The mean postoperative hospital stay was 3.889 ± 1.09 and 4.558 ± 1.33 days in supine and prone group (P = .021), respectively. Four patients in group S required re-look PCNL in comparison to 8 in group P. Overall SFR at 1 month was 76.92% and 68.51% (P .331), respectively in case of group S and P. Conclusion: The study revealed that supine position in Calcutta position is a viable alternative to classical prone position even in patients with complex renal stone and patients with difficult anatomy as major complications are less, SFR is higher, and need of auxiliary procedures are rare.
Systematic review of the clinical application in supine and prone PCNL

Xu Shitian,Wang Jiawu,Zhang Chengyao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1671-8348.2012.03.004

2012-01-01

Abstract:Objective To systematically review the safety and efficacy of supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy.Methods To retrieve controlled trials of supine and prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy,and investigate reference documents of literatures included.Data analyses of literatures which consistent with included standard were performed with the Cochrane ColLaboration′s RevMan 5.0 software.Results Five literatures were retrieved,including 422 patients,done Meta-analysis.The Meta-analysis results showed that compared with control group,patients in test group:(1) decrease the mean operation time by 24.76 min(95%CI:-39.35~-10.17,P=0.000 9);(2) there was no significant difference between the two ways with Mean hospital stay,post-operation transfusion,post-operation fever,post-operation urine leakage,and stone-free rate(95%CI:-11.80-3.55,0.90-4.56,0.24-1.03,0.66-1.81,0.49-4.83).Conclusion Supine PCNL is a safe and effective method.Because of few studies and small samples,more high quality trials with large samples are proposed.
Comparison on Efficacy and Safety of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for the Treatment of Renal Stones:Modified Supine Valdivia Versus Prone Position

Zhou Shuigen,Wang Ling,Xu Xiaofeng,Wang Longxin,Dong Jie,Zhou Kai,Zhang Zhengyu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1000-6702.2015.06.002

2015-01-01

Abstract:Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of percutaneous nephrolithotomy ( PCNL) in modified supine Valdivia and traditional prone positions for the treatment of renal stones.Methods Clinical data of 80 consecutive patients with renal calculi who accepted PCNL from December 2012 to September 2014 were retrospectively reviewed.They were divided into modified supine Valdivia group ( n=44) and prone position group (n=36) according to the position during surgery.There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in age, sex, ASA class, stone location and size (P>0.05).Total operative time, ratio of multi-access, blood loss, perioperative complications and stone-free rate were compared between the 2 groups.Results All punctures were performed successfully.No case was converted to open surgery.No severe complications such as colon injury, pleura or peritoneum perforation, or death occurred intra-and post-operatively.In prone position, 1 patient was found to develop high intra-trachea pressure because of large stone burden and prolonged operative time (130 min).This procedure was stopped and the patient received the second session of PCNL 1 week later.The mean total operative time was significantly shorter in the modified supine than in the prone position ( 67.7 ±24.5 min versus 91.5 ±29.8 min, P<0.05).There were no significant differences in ratio of multi-access (14% versus 22%), mean blood loss (1.3 ±0.2 g/L versus 1.4 ±0.7 g/L), incidence of complications (18% versus 19%), and stone clearance rate ( 80% versus 86%) between the 2 groups ( P >0.05 ) .Conclusion PCNL in modified supine Valdivia is as safe and effective as that of prone position for the treatment of renal stones, but the former is more time-saving than the latter.
Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Semisupine Position: a Modified Approach for Renal Calculus

Ke-wei Xu,Jian Huang,Zheng-hui Guo,Tian-xin Lin,Cai-xai Zhang,Hao Liu,Jian Chun,You-sheng Yao,Jin-li Han,Hai Huang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-011-0366-x

2011-01-01

Urological Research

Abstract:Conventional percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is usually performed in a prone position, which compresses the thorax and results in difficulty in rescue during operation. When PCNL is performed in a supine position, the flank renal puncture area is limited, so it is difficult to treat disseminated and complex renal calculi. Herein, we introduce a modified semisupine position for performing PCNL, which has numerous benefits as well as safe and effective. Between May 2002 and May 2009, a total of 452 patients with renal calculi were treated with semisupine PCNL. The patient was placed in 45° semisupine position during the procedure, with the affected flank arched as much as possible. In this series, no one converted to open surgery. The average operating time was (115.2 ± 44.5) min. Single tract PCNL was performed for 80.97% of the cases, two tracts 13.94%, three tracts 4.65%, and four tracts 0.44%. The upper, middle, and lower calix tracts accounted for 12.1, 63.0, and 24.9%, of procedures, respectively. Stone-free rate was 85.7% overall, 92.2% for single calculus (83/90), and 72.9% for staghorn calculi (78/107). Major postoperative complications occurred in 3.3% of the cases. This study demonstrated PCNL in a semisupine position is an effective alternative for treating renal calculi, which combines the advantages of PCNL in a prone position, and PCNL in a supine position. The semisupine position allows easier irrigation of stone fragments, is more comfortable for the patient, and facilitates monitoring of anesthesia.
Prone vs supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy: does position affect renal pelvic pressures?

Ala’a Farkouh,Kyu Park,Matthew I. Buell,Nicole Mack,Cliff De Guzman,Toby Clark,Elizabeth A. Baldwin,Kanha Shete,Rose Leu,Akin S. Amasyali,Evan Seibly,Kai Wen Cheng,Sikai Song,Zhamshid Okhunov,D. Duane Baldwin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-024-01555-6

2024-04-19

Urolithiasis

Abstract:The purpose of this study was to measure and compare renal pelvic pressure (RPP) between prone and supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in a benchtop model. Six identical silicone kidney models were placed into anatomically correct prone or supine torsos constructed from patient CT scans in the corresponding positions. A 30-Fr renal access sheath was placed in either the upper, middle, or lower pole calyx for both prone and supine positions. Two 9-mm BegoStones were placed in the respective calyx and RPPs were measured at baseline, irrigating with a rigid nephroscope, and irrigating with a flexible nephroscope. Five trials were conducted for each access in both prone and supine positions. The average baseline RPP in the prone position was significantly higher than the supine position (9.1 vs 2.7 mmHg; p < 0.001). Similarly, the average RPP in prone was significantly higher than supine when using both the rigid and flexible nephroscopes. When comparing RPPs for upper, middle, and lower pole access sites, there was no significant difference in pressures in either prone or supine positions ( p > 0.05 for all). Overall, when combining all pressures at baseline and with irrigation, with all access sites and types of scopes, the mean RPP was significantly higher in the prone position compared to the supine position (14.0 vs 3.2 mmHg; p < 0.001). RPPs were significantly higher in the prone position compared to the supine position in all conditions tested. These differences in RPPs between prone and supine PCNL could in part explain the different clinical outcomes, including postoperative fever and stone-free rates.

urology & nephrology
Comparison of safety and efficacy of different positions in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a network Meta-analysis

Puhan Li,Yucheng Ma,Banghua Liao,Xi Jin,Liyuan Xiang,Hong Li,Kunjie Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/js9.0000000000001130

2024-03-04

International Journal of Surgery

Abstract:Objectives: Various new positions for percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) were proposed to reduce the limitations of the traditional position. This study was aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the different PCNL positions. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to April 18, 2023. We collected five common surgical positions used for PCNL: oblique supine position (OSP), supine position (SP), flank position (FP), split-leg oblique supine/flank position (SLP), and prone position (PP). Paired and network meta-analysis were conducted to compare relevant outcomes, including complications, operative time, stone free rates, hospital stay and hemoglobin loss among these different positions. Results: The study included 17 RCTs with a total of 1841 patients. The result demonstrated that SLP significantly outperformed in terms of decreasing operation time (FP vs SLP MD- MD-41.65; OSP vs SLP MD 28.97; PP vs SLP MD 34.94), hospital stay, and hemoglobin loss. Ranking probabilities showed SLP had highest stone-free rate. Prone position was more likely to occur complications than others. Based on SMAA model, the benefit-risk analysis suggested the SLP was the optimal position in PCNL. Conclusions: For PCNL, the split-leg, flank, supine, and oblique supine positions are as secure as the prone position. Further RCTs are necessary to confirm the outstanding safety and efficacy of split-leg position. Besides, the position should be selected regard for the patient’s demands, the surgeon’s preference and learning curve.

surgery
Flank-free modified supine vs. prone position for pediatric nephrolithotripsy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Breno C. Porto,Roberto N. Santana,Ingrid M. S. Duarte,Carlo C. Passerotti,Rodrigo A. S. Sardenberg,Ronaldo S. Maia,Jose P. Otoch,Jose A. S. da Cruz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-024-01660-z

2024-11-30

BMC Urology

Abstract:Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is widely performed as the preferred treatment for kidney stones larger than 20 mm in pediatric patients, with current research focusing on comparing outcomes between prone and supine positions to determine optimal procedural positioning. Therefore, the aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of prone versus supine positioning in pediatric PCNL, providing clarity on this critical aspect of the procedure to guide clinical decision-making.

urology & nephrology
Flank versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

Changjian Zheng,Hongmei Yang,Yalan Lv,Lin Yang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-024-01557-4

2024-04-26

Urolithiasis

Abstract:The objective of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of the flank position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). We searched PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, the Cochrane database libraries, and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing PCNL in flank position are included in this meta-analysis. The related trials met the inclusion criteria were analyzed using RevMan 5.4. Seven randomized controlled trials were included, involving a total of 587 patients. We found that there was a lower decrease in hemoglobin levels in the flank position group compared to prone-position group (mean difference [MD] = − 0.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) − 0.22 to − 0.08, P < 0.00001). Moreover, our meta-analysis demonstrated no significant differences between groups regarding stone-free rate (relative risk [RR] = 1.00, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.06, P = 0.92), operative time(MD = 0.76, 95% CI − 5.31 to 6.83, P < 0.00001), hospital stay (MD = 0.03, 95% CI − 0.32 to 0.32, P < 0.00001), and complications Clavien grade I (RR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.05, P = 0.54), Clavien grade II (RR = 1, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.02, P = 0.78), and Clavien grade III (RR = 1, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.03, P = 0.77). The use of flank position for PCNL is associated with reduced hemoglobin change without an increase in complications. This positioning technique can be considered safe for patients with nephrolithiasis and may be particularly suitable for high-risk individuals such as those who are obese or have decreased cardiopulmonary function. However, further randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings.

urology & nephrology
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF PERCUTANEOUS NEPHROLITHOTOMY IN SUPINE VERSUS PRONE POSITION

N. Dhinakar Babu,D. Mohan Kumar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.36106/paripex/6900823

2023-03-15

Paripex Indian Journal Of Research

Abstract:Prone positioning in percutaneous nephrolithotomy is more and more being replaced by supine positioning now a days for its various benefits. This is a prospective study which does Comparative study on percutaneous nephrolithotomy in supine versus prone position and their various outcomes were analysed. There were totally 100 patients included in the study with 50 patients each group (supine versus prone). 57 were male and 43 female patients. Age ranging from 18 to 70 years. Right side stones were 58 and left side was 42. Age, gender and side of stones were similar between two groups. Stone burden were 2.6cm and 2.9cm for supine and prone group respectively. But average operating time were 63.5 minutes ( 35 to 120 minutes) for supine group versus 80 minutes ( 45 to 160 minutes) for prone group. fluoroscopy time was 18.9 minutes for supine group versus 29.4 minutes for prone group. Clearance rate in our study were pretty good in both groups around 90% in both groups (90% vs 88%). five had complications in form of sepsis and bleeding requiring blood transfusion in both groups. Five in supine group and six in prone group required second procedures. Thus Supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy group had significant advantage in terms of less operative duration and less fluoroscopy time than prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy . The stone clearance and complication rates were similar in both the groups
Which Position for Novice Surgeons? Effect of Supine and Prone Positions on Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Learning Curve

Ender Cem Bulut,Uğur Aydın,Çağrı Coşkun,Serhat Çetin,Ali Ünsal,Fazlı Polat,Bora Küpeli

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina60081292

2024-08-10

Abstract:Background and Objectives: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is a current treatment method with high success rates and low complication rates in treating large kidney stones. It can be conducted in different positions, especially supine and prone positions. PCNL in the supine position is becoming increasingly common due to its advantages, such as simultaneous retrograde intervention and better anesthesia management. This study aimed to assess how the choice of position impacts the PCNL learning curve. Materials and Methods: The results of the first 50 consecutive PCNL cases performed by two separate chief residents as primary surgeons in supine and prone positions in a reference center for stone treatment between August 2021 and January 2023 were evaluated. The two groups' demographic and clinical data, stone-free rates, operation times, and fluoroscopy times were compared. Results: While the mean operation time was 94.6 ± 9.8 min in the supine PCNL group, it was 129.9 ± 20.3 min in the prone PCNL group (p < 0.001). Median fluoroscopy times in the supine PCNL and prone PCNL groups were 31 (10-89) seconds and 48 (23-156) seconds, respectively (p = 0.001). During the operation, the plateau was reached after the 10th case in the supine PCNL group, while it was reached after the 40th case in the prone PCNL group. Conclusions: For surgeons who are novices in performing PCNL, supine PCNL may offer both better results and a faster learning curve. Prospective and randomized studies can provide more robust conclusions on this subject.
Supine versus prone PCNL in lower calyceal stone: Comparative study in a tertiary care center

Sunirmal Choudhury,Paragmani Talukdar,Tapan Kumar Mandal,Tapas Kumar Majhi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0391560320962404

2020-10-07

Urologia Journal

Abstract:Introduction: Renal calculus disease is an age old disease of human being. PCNL (Percutaneous nephrolithotomy) stands as a gold standard treatment for large renal calculus which is traditionally being done in prone position. Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of supine PCNL versus prone PCNL comparing intraoperative time, requirement of relook PCNL, post op hemoglobin drop, post operative hospital stay, post operative complication, SFR ( stone free rate). Methods and materials: It is a prospective study done in Urology department in a tertiary care center in Eastern India between October 2017 and October 2018. A total of 84 patients with lower calyceal renal stones underwent PCNL, 42 of them in supine and 42 in prone position. Lower calyceal stone, size measuring 1 to 2 cm were included in the study. Results: The mean intra operative time was 91.76 min in supine group and 85.43 min in prone group with a p value of 0.115. The mean hemoglobin drop was 1.11 g/dl and 1.18 g/dl in supine and prone position, respectively ( p value 0.75). The mean post operative hospital stay was 4.1 and 3.86 days in supine and prone group ( p value 0.58), respectively. Two patients in each group require relook PCNL. Stone free rate at 1 month was 95.23% and 90.47% ( p value 0.9), respectively in case of supine and prone group. Conclusion: Supine PCNL is feasible, comparable to prone PCNL in respect to operative parameters with relatively higher stone free rate though statistically insignificant.
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in complete supine flank-free position in comparison to prone position: A single-centre experience

Nadeem Sohail,Amjad Albodour,Khalid Mohammed Abdelrahman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2016.10.001

2016-10-31

Abstract:Objectives: To assess the outcomes of performing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in a modified supine position, more feasible for surgeons, anaesthetists, and operating theatre staff, as well as for the patient himself, and evaluating it in comparison to the standard prone position. Patient and methods: A retrospective, case-control study was conducted between January 2011 and December 2015. In all, 197 patient's records were reviewed. The initial 101 patients were operated upon in prone position. From mid-2013, 96 patients were operated upon in a complete supine, flank-free position. The groups were compared in terms of operation time, calculated from positioning the patient after anaesthesia induction, insertion of ureteric catheter, puncture of renal system, until the end of procedure; stone-free rate; hospital stay; and postoperative complications, such as transfusion rate, fever, and urinary leakage. Results: There were two significant differences between the groups. Firstly, the operation time was a mean (SD) 32.3 (6.6) min shorter for the supine versus the prone position (P < 0.001). Secondly, hospital stay was a mean (SD) 1.2 (0.75) days shorter for the supine vs the prone position (P < 0.001). The complete stone clearance rate (85.4% for supine vs 79.2% for prone; P = 0.2) and postoperative complications (7.3% for supine vs 17.8% for prone; P = 0.02) were comparable in both groups. Conclusion: Supine PCNL is a feasible procedure with similar outcomes in terms of stone-free rate as well as postoperative complications, to the standard prone PCNL. It reduces unnecessary delay that occurs during change of position resulting in significant shortening of the total operation time and surgeons can perform supine PCNL whilst sitting.
Supine Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Preliminary experience in a single hospital

Tanweer Ahmed Naweed Bhatty,Eemaz Nathaniel,Sadaf Noureen,Nadeem Iqbal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.40.8.9188

Abstract:Background and objective: Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is recommended for large Kidney Stones. It is mostly done in prone position. However, PCNL in Supine position is another safe option. Only few centers in country are doing it and so it is challenging task to adopt supine PCNL approach in an institution initially. In this study our purpose was to assess initial experience of Supine PCNL in our center. Methods: It is a preliminary retrospective study of our first fifty-one supine PCNL procedures, performed by a single Surgeon, over Twelve months period, from April 2021 to April 2022. We managed a retrospective review of patients' records. Analysis was completed by utilizing SPSS version 20. Implementation of Mean along with standard deviation values was utilized for continuous variables. While frequency/percentages represented categorical factors. Results: Patients mean age was 39 years, comprising of 62.74% male and 37.25% female patients. Thirty patients had their stones treated on the left side. Mean Stone burden was 3.2 cm. Most of the stones were GUYs score one and two (complexity wise). The mean procedure time 147minutes. Mean hospital stay of 2.17 days was observed in this study. Forty patients were stone free. Only seven patients (14%) had level I-II complications (Clavien-Dindo classification). Conclusion: Supine PCNL can be adopted safely in an institute if careful selection of patients is done before surgery. In our center it had acceptable success rates and few complications.

Supine Versus Prone Position in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Kidney Calculi: a Meta-Analysis.

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

Is the supine position superior to the prone position for percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL)?

Prone Versus Modified Supine Position In Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Prospective Randomized Study

Supine Versus Prone Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL): A Single Surgeon's Experience

Supine versus prone pediatric percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Systematic review and meta-analysis of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in flank versus prone position

A meta analysis of the lateral decubitus position and prone position percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Prospective Comparative Analysis of Supine Versus Prone Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Patients with Complex Renal Stone Disease and Difficult Anatomy

Systematic review of the clinical application in supine and prone PCNL

Comparison on Efficacy and Safety of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for the Treatment of Renal Stones:Modified Supine Valdivia Versus Prone Position

Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Semisupine Position: a Modified Approach for Renal Calculus

Prone vs supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy: does position affect renal pelvic pressures?

Comparison of safety and efficacy of different positions in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a network Meta-analysis

Flank-free modified supine vs. prone position for pediatric nephrolithotripsy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Flank versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF PERCUTANEOUS NEPHROLITHOTOMY IN SUPINE VERSUS PRONE POSITION

Which Position for Novice Surgeons? Effect of Supine and Prone Positions on Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Learning Curve

Supine versus prone PCNL in lower calyceal stone: Comparative study in a tertiary care center

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in complete supine flank-free position in comparison to prone position: A single-centre experience

Supine Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Preliminary experience in a single hospital