Percutaneous Urolithiasis Surgery in Military

V. V. Protoshak; Протощак В. В.; M. V. Paronnikov; Паронников М. В.; A. A. Sivakov; Сиваков А. А.; K. A. Lukinov; Лукинов К. А.; A. O. Kiselev; Киселев А. О.; S. A. Alentiev; Алентьев С. А.; M. V. Lazutkin; Лазуткин М. В.

doi:10.17816/brmma50527

Percutaneous Urolithiasis Surgery in Military

Authors: Protoshak V.V.¹, Paronnikov M.V.¹, Sivakov A.A.¹, Lukinov K.A.¹, Kiselev A.O.¹, Alentiev S.A.¹, Lazutkin M.V.¹
Affiliations:
1. Military medical academy of S.M. Kirov
Issue: Vol 22, No 3 (2020)
Pages: 29-34
Section: Clinical trials
URL: https://journals.rcsi.science/1682-7392/article/view/50527
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17816/brmma50527
ID: 50527

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access
Restricted Access

Access granted
Restricted Access

Subscription Access

Abstract
Full Text
About the authors
References
Supplementary files
Statistics

Abstract

Abstract. The clinical efficacy and safety of the use of percutaneous techniques in the treatment of kidney stones in 72 servicemen were studied. All percutaneous operations were performed by one operating team. It was found that percutaneous urolithiasis surgery was effective in 88.9% of people. «Stone free rate» was achieved in 83,8% of military personnel undergoing standard percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy and in 94.3% of patients undergoing minipercutaneous nephrolitholapaxy. With stones larger than 2 cm, the effect was observed in 81.8% of cases with standard surgery and in 96% of patients with mini-percutaneous approach. Percutaneous interventions in military personnel with stones larger than 2 cm were effective in 84,6% of patients with standard surgery and in 90% with mini-percutaneous access. Complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification were found in 29,1% of servicemen: in 20,8% of cases of standard nephrolitholapaxy and in 8,3% of minipercutaneous nephrolitholapaxy. The bulk of the complications were Grade I–II – 20,8%. Grade III – IV were determined less frequently – in 8,3% of cases. Urosepsis (Grade IV b) and death (Grade V) were not observed in our study. Duration of labor losses for conscripted servicemen were about 17 days, for contract servicemen when performing standard nephrolitholapaxy – 12,8 days, for military personnel with minipercutaneous nephrolitholapaxy – 11,2 days. The dismissal rate among conscripts was 18,2%. There were no contractual servicemen who were dismissed from the ranks of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, however, 14,7% of servicemen who underwent a standard operation and 11,1% of patients who underwent mini-percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy after surgery needed sick leave for a period of 15 days. In general, percutaneous techniques are common and effective methods of surgical treatment for military personnel suffering from urolithiasis. Mini-percutaneous approach for nephrolitholapaxy is safer than the standard approach, but it is less effective for coral calculi. Percutaneous methods for removing kidney stones are associated with a low rate of dismissal and short recovery times for military personnel.

Keywords

urolithiasis, kidney stones, military personnel, standard percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy, mini-percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy, treatment effectiveness, complications, labor loss, dismissal

Full Text

##article.viewOnOriginalSite##

References

Авдошин, В.П. Комплексное лечение и метафилактика уратного и смешанного уролитиаза: метод. пособие для врачей / В.П. Авдошин, М.И. Андрюхин, М.Н. Исрафилов. – М.: Спецкнига, 2013. – 32 c.
Агаронян, A.B. Медико-социальная составляющая развития и лечения мочекаменной болезни у военнослужащих Северного флота / A.B. Агаронян [и др.] // Экол. чел. – 2008. – № 11. – С. 42–47.
Аполихин, О.И. Заболеваемость мочекаменной болезнью в Российской Федерации (2005–2016 годы) / О.И. Аполихин [и др.] // Эксп. и клин. урология. – 2018. – № 4 (36). – С. 4–14.
Меринов, Д.С. Минимально инвазивная перкутанная нефролитотрипсия: деликатный и эффективный инструмент в лечении крупных камней почек / Д.С. Меринов [и др.] // Эксп. и клин. урология. – 2013. – № 3 (15). – С. 94–98.
Положение о военно-врачебной экспертизе: утв. постановлением Правительства РФ от 04.07.2013 г. № 565 с изм. 01.10.2014 г. №1005// Собр. законодательства Рос. Федерации. – 15.07.2013. – № 28. – Ст. 3831; 13.10.2014. – № 41. – Ст. 5537.
Шестаев, А.Ю. Гендерные эпидемиологические особенности мочекаменной болезни у военнослужащих / А.Ю. Шестаев [и др.] // Воен.-мед. журн. – 2014. – № 12 (335). – С. 45–47.
Шестаев, А.Ю. Эндоскопические методы лечения мочекаменной болезни / А.Ю. Шестаев [и др.]. – СПб.: ВМА, 2017. – 41 с.
Albala, D.M. Lower pole I: a prospective randomized trial of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrostolithotomy for lower pole nephrolithiasis-initial results / D.M. Albala [et al.] // – 2002 – № 4 (167). – P. 1805.
Al-Kohlany, K.M. Treatment of complete staghorn stones: a prospective randomized comparison of open surgery versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy / K.M. Al-Kohlany [et al.] // J. Urol. –2005. – № 2 (173). – P. 469–473.
De la Rosette, J.J. Prognostic factors and percutaneous nephrolithotomy morbidity: a multivariate analysis of a contemporary series using the Clavien classification / J.J. De la Rosette [et al.] // Urol. – 2008. – № 6 (180). – P. 2489–2493.
Fernström, I. Percutaneous pyelolithotomy. A new extraction technique / I.Fernström [et al.] // Scand. J. Urol. Nephrol. – 1976. – № 3 (10). – P. 257–259.
Geraghty, R. M. Worldwide Trends of Urinary Stone Disease Treatment Over the Last Two Decades: A Systematic Review / R.M. Geraghty [et al.] // J. Endourol. – 2017. – № 6 (31). – P. 547–556.
Kamphuis, G.M. Lessons learned from the CROES percutaneous nephrolithotomy global study / G.M. Kamphuis [et al.] // World J. Urol. – 2015. – № 2 (33). – P. 223–233.
Knoll, T. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: technique / T. Knoll [et al.] // World. J. Urol. – 2017. – № 9 (35). – P. 1361–1368.
Lahme, S. Miniaturisation of PCNL / S. Lahme // Urolithiasis. – 2017. – № 1 (46). – P. 99–106.
Meretyk, S. Complete staghorn calculi: random prospective comparison between extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy monotherapy and combined with percutaneous nephrostolithotomy / S. Meretyk [et al.] // J. Urol. – 1997. – № 3 (157). – P. 780–786.
Michel, M.S. Complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy / Eur. Urol. –2006. № 1 (4). – P. 899–906.
Nakada, S.Y. Surgical Management of Urolithiasis / S.Y. Nakada, M. S. Pearle // New York: Springer. – 2013. – 197 p.
Skolarikos, A. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy and its legacy / A. Skolarikos // Eur. Urol. – 2005. – № 1 (47). – Р. 22–28.
Tefekli, A. Classification of percutaneous nephrolithotomy complications using the modified Clavien grading system: looking for a standard / A. Tefekli [et al.] // Eur. Urol. 2008. – № 1 (53). – P. 184–190.
Turk, C. EAU guidelines on urolithiasis / C. Turk [et al.] // Eur. Urol. 2016. – № 3 (69). – P. 468–474.
Turney, B.W. Trends in urological stone disease / B.W. Turney [et al.] // B.J.U. Int. – 2011. – № 7 (109). – P. 1082–1087.