M. Hruza, J. Rioja Zuazu, A. Serdar Goezen, J.J.M.C.H. de la Rosette, J.J. RassweilerFigure 1.The renal pelvis of a horse shoe kidney is open forlaparoscopic removal of a stone.Figure 2.After a longitudinal incision of the ureterthe ureteral calculus is visible.Figure 3.A gras<strong>per</strong> is used to remove the stonefrom the ureter.large stone, intracorporal ultrasound (50), a combinationof laparoscopy and <strong>per</strong>cutaneous nephroscopy(26) or the insertion of a flexible scope through one ofthe ports (25) can be helpful. An organ bag can help tobring out large or multiple stones. After stone removal,the renal pelvis is closed using a running intracorporalsuture. If no Double-J stent was placed preo<strong>per</strong>atively,it should be inserted before suturing. We normally usean additional drain in the retro<strong>per</strong>itoneal space to preventthe formation of an urinoma.c) Trans<strong>per</strong>itoneal removal of stones in a diverticulum of therenal pelvis: In the majority of cases, there is only a thinlayer of tissue to be inserted using electrocauterisation tofree the stone (51). In some cases there is difficulty tolocalise the diverticulum because it does not bulge outover the contour of the kidney. Therefore, preo<strong>per</strong>ativeimaging is recommended in all cases. Sometimes, intracorporaluntrasound can be useful, too (50). Afterremoval of the stone and the diverticulum, the gap maybe filled with fatty tissue or Gerota’s fascia (28, 51).Synthetic glue can also be considered for closure (29).d) Trans<strong>per</strong>itoneal pyelolithotomy in kidneys with anatomicalabnormalities: In cases of ectopic or malrotated kidneysor in kidneys with irregular form, modificationsin the way of access and in the position of the trocarscan be necessary. These procedures should only bedone by ex<strong>per</strong>ienced laparoscopists. Preo<strong>per</strong>atively,accurate imaging and planning are mandatory.– The prevalence of horseshoe kidneys is about 0.25%.Frequently the are associated with complications asobstruction, infection of stone formation (52, 53).Because both pelvises point ventrally they can besufficiently reached using a trans<strong>per</strong>itoneal access(54) (Figure 1).– The prevalence of pelvic kidneys is lower (0.02-0.03%). On the left side they are more frequentthan on the right (55, 56). The laparoscopic accessto a pelvic kidney is trans<strong>per</strong>itoneal (23-27, 57). Atthe beginning, a transureteral balloon catheter isplaced into the renal pelvis to make its laparoscopicidentification easier. After filling the renal pelviswith contrast media, X-rays can be used for orientation(23, 24).In cases of pelvic kidneys as well as horseshoe kidneys,the technique of laparoscopic assisted <strong>per</strong>cutaneousnephrolithotripsy is described. The <strong>per</strong>cutaneouspuncture of the renal pelvis with a needle isdone under laparoscopic guidance to prevent injuriesto other structures in difficult anatomical circumstances.Laparoscopic instruments can be used toguide the needle into its aim1 (9, 58, 59).e) Trans<strong>per</strong>itoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: After openingthe <strong>per</strong>itoneum, the ureter is exposed. Importantanatomical landmarks are the psoas muscle and thegonadal veins. Large stones are clearly identifiable inmost cases, for smaller stones imaging can be used asdescribed for stones in the renal pelvis. After identificationof the calculus, the ureter is temporarily occludedproximally and distally of the stone to prevent shifting.Most authors prefer a longitudinal incision of the ureterfor stone removal (Figures 2 and 3). The closure of theureter should be done using an intracorporal suture66Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia 2010; 82, 1
Laparoscopic and open stone surgeryafter inserting a Double-J stent (Figures 4 and 5).However, some authors state that a suture was not necessarywhen a stent was put in place. A drain should beinserted to prevent the formation of an urinoma irrespectiveof the closure technique (32, 38, 40, 49, 60).Retro<strong>per</strong>itoneal accessThe patient is placed in flank position. A 15 to 18 mmincision is made in the lumbar triangle (Petit´s triangle)between the twelfth rib and the iliac crest, bounded bythe lateral edges of the latissimus dorsi and externaloblique muscles. After creating a tunnel to the retro<strong>per</strong>itonealspace using overhold forceps for blunt dissection,the tunnel is dilated until an index finger can be inserted.The <strong>per</strong>itoneum is pushed forward by the index finger,a retro<strong>per</strong>itoneal cavity is created. Now the cavity iswidened using a balloon-trocar system. Under palpationwith the index finger, which is introduced through theprimary access, two secondary trocars (10 mm and 5mm) are inserted. The primary incision is closed arounda camera port to prevent gas leakage. The pneumoretro<strong>per</strong>itoneumis established using a maximum carbondioxide pressure of 12 mm Hg and a flow of 3.5l/min. A forth trocar can be inserted if needed.Independent of the retro<strong>per</strong>itoneoscopic procedure <strong>per</strong>formed,Gerota’s fascia is incised completely. The psoasmuscle is exposed as the most important anatomicallandmark. Now, all further anatomical structures such asureter, s<strong>per</strong>matic/ovarian vein and the lower pole of thekidney can be exposed. The incision of the renal pelvisor of the ureter for stone removal is done in a similar wayas described for the trans<strong>per</strong>itoneal access.Figure 4.Insertation of a Double-J-stent.Figure 5.Intracorporal suturing of the ureter after stone removal.DISCUSSIONTechnique of open and laparoscopic stone surgeryThe size and the location of a ureteral stone play animportant role in the decision between endourologicaltreatment, shock wave therapy, open surgical therapyand laparoscopic stone removal. As described in an articleby Park et al., there is a relevant difference in the successrates of ureteroscopic treatment of distal and proximalureteral stones (94.6% versus 75.0%). Freedom fromstones is achieved after one session of shock wavelithotripsy in 84% of all cases with a stone size up to 10mm, but only in 42% of the cases with larger stones (61).Pace et al. reported similar results of shock wavelithotripsy depending on stone size (74% in patientswith stones < 10 mm versus 43% in individuals withstones > 10 mm) (62). Keeley et al. however, stated thatindications for open and laparoscopic stone surgery willfurthermore be minimized due to technical improvementsin endourology (for example due to the introductionof Holmium laser in ureteroscopy) (37).This prediction will surely come true in Europe andNorthern America. In contrast, there is a completely differentsituation in developing countries. In those countries,a high incidence of huge renal and ureteral stonesis found, combined with very poor financial resourcesand problems in medical infrastructure and availabilityof modern endourological instruments. In this environmentopen stone surgery provides several advantages:The instruments needed are simple, wide-spread, inexpensiveand low-maintenance. The wages of medical<strong>per</strong>sonal and the costs of o<strong>per</strong>ating facilities are low. Inopen surgery, the consumption of resources is significantlylower than in endourological procedures.Freedom from stones is usually reached within one singlehospital stay. This results with low costs for thepatients who usually do not have an adequate healthinsurance. Repeated hospital stays for the treatment ofthe same stone are avoided. Interestingly, Kijvikai andPatcharatrakul from Thailand reported that more andmore surgeons in their country use the benefits oflaparoscopy: Laparoscopy combines the main advantagesof open stone surgery, the high stone-free rate within onetreatment session, with the benefits of minimally-invasivetreatment (shorter hospital stay and convalescence,less consumption of analgesics) (49).Concerning the technique of laparoscopic stone surgerycan be stated that a larger working space and a morefamiliar overview of the anatomical landmarks are theArchivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia 2010; 82, 167
- Page 2 and 3:
Official Journal of the SIEUN, the
- Page 4 and 5:
ContentsHistological evaluation of
- Page 7 and 8:
R. Leonardi, R. Caltabiano, S. Lanz
- Page 9 and 10:
R. Leonardi, R. Caltabiano, S. Lanz
- Page 11 and 12:
F. Galasso, R. Giannella, P. Bruni,
- Page 13 and 14:
F. Galasso, R. Giannella, P. Bruni,
- Page 15 and 16:
ORIGINAL PAPERSurgery for renal cel
- Page 17 and 18:
S.D. Dyakov, G. Lucarelli, A.I. Hin
- Page 19 and 20: S.D. Dyakov, G. Lucarelli, A.I. Hin
- Page 21 and 22: M. Aza, S.S. Iqbal, M.V. Muhammad,
- Page 23 and 24: Archivio Italiano di Urologia e And
- Page 25 and 26: The Clavien classification system t
- Page 27 and 28: PRESENTATIONPercutaneous nephrolith
- Page 29 and 30: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: An ex
- Page 31 and 32: PCNL in ItalyTable 1.Number and hos
- Page 33 and 34: PCNL in ItalyFigure 3.Comparison be
- Page 35 and 36: The patient position for PNL: Does
- Page 37 and 38: PCNL: Tips and tricks in targeting,
- Page 39 and 40: Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithoto
- Page 41 and 42: PRESENTATIONHigh burden and complex
- Page 43 and 44: High burden and complex renal calcu
- Page 45 and 46: PRESENTATIONEndoscopic combined int
- Page 47 and 48: PRESENTATIONHigh burden stones: The
- Page 49 and 50: PRESENTATIONStone treatment in chil
- Page 51 and 52: Stone treatment in children: Where
- Page 53 and 54: PRESENTATIONExtracorporeal shock wa
- Page 55 and 56: PRESENTATIONPercutaneous nephrolith
- Page 57 and 58: PRESENTATIONFlexible ureteroscopy f
- Page 59 and 60: Flexible ureteroscopy for kidney st
- Page 61 and 62: Indications, prediction of success
- Page 63 and 64: Indications, prediction of success
- Page 65 and 66: Indications, prediction of success
- Page 67 and 68: Indications, prediction of success
- Page 69: Laparoscopic and open stone surgery
- Page 73 and 74: Laparoscopic and open stone surgery
- Page 75: Laparoscopic and open stone surgery