Pulsed versus continuous mode fluoroscopy during PCNL: safety and effectiveness comparison in a case series study

To compare the total fluoroscopy time (FT) based on the fluoroscopy mode used—continuous vs. pulsed—in patients who underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). The study cohort evaluated 111 patients who underwent PCNL by a single surgeon. Standard (continuous) fluoroscopy of 30 frames per second...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Urolithiasis 2016-11, Vol.44 (6), p.565-570
Main Authors: Durutovic, Otas, Dzamic, Zoran, Milojevic, Bogomir, Nikic, Predrag, Mimic, Ana, Bumbasirevic, Uros, Vuksanovic, Aleksandar, Petronic, Dragica Milenkovic, Papatsoris, Athanasios, Skolarikos, Andreas
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Cohort Studies
Female
Fluoroscopy - methods
Humans
Male
Medical Biochemistry
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Middle Aged
Nephrology
Nephrostomy, Percutaneous - adverse effects
Nephrostomy, Percutaneous - methods
Original Paper
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Urology
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To compare the total fluoroscopy time (FT) based on the fluoroscopy mode used—continuous vs. pulsed—in patients who underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). The study cohort evaluated 111 patients who underwent PCNL by a single surgeon. Standard (continuous) fluoroscopy of 30 frames per second (fps) was used in the first 56 cases (SF group), while the next 55 consecutive cases were performed under pulsed fluoroscopy of two fps (PF group). The presence of surgeon’s previous experience decreased the possible impact of the learning curve on the outcome. In both groups, using ultrasound in combination to fluoroscopy performed the renal access. The stone complexity was determined using Guy’s stone score (GSS). Complications were evaluated using Clavien-Dindo classification. Median FT was significantly lower in PF group (76.8 s) compared to SF group (155.4 s) ( p  
ISSN:2194-7228
2194-7236
DOI:10.1007/s00240-016-0885-6