Abstract
There is still much controversy in the literature concerning the optimal approach for PNL. Although prone PNL remains predominant on a global level, with a superior acquired experience and more training opportunities when compared to supine position, supine PNL is increasingly used and it is now quite consensual that it allows an easier management from the anaesthesiological point of view and may reduce patient morbidity. The available randomized studies demonstrate that in centers which already standardized the supine technique, this procedure may be more ergonomic and quicker and equally efficient in terms of stone clearance and morbidity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Valdivia Uría JG, Valle Gerhold J, Lopez Lopez JA et al (1998) Technique and complications of percutaneous nephroscopy: experience with 557 patients in the supine position. J Urol 160:1975–1978
Ibarluzea G, Scoffone CM, Cracco CM et al (2007) Supine Valdivia and modified lithotomy position for simultaneous anterograde and retrograde endourological access. BJU Int 100:233–236
De Sio M, Autorino R, Quarto G et al (2008) Modified supine versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal stones treatable with a single percutaneous access: a prospective randomized trial. Eur Urol 54:196–202
Manohar T, Jain P, Desai M (2007) Supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy: effective approach to high-risk and morbidly obese patients. J Endourol 21:44–49
Ng MT, Sun WH, Cheng CW, Chan ES (2004) Supine position is safe and effective for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 18:469–474
Scoffone CM, Cracco CM, Cossu M et al (2008) Endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia position: a new standard for percutaneous nephrolithotomy? Eur Urol 54(6):1393–1403
Shoma AM, Eraky I, El-Kenawy MR, El-Kappany HA (2002) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the supine position: technical aspects and functional outcome compared with the prone technique. Urology 60:388–392
Steele D, Marshall V (2007) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the supine position: a neglected approach? J Endourol 21:1433–1437
de la Rosette JJ, Tsakiris P, Ferrandino MN et al (2008) Beyond prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a comprehensive review. Eur Urol 54:1262–1269
Basiri A, Mohammadi Sichani M (2009) Supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy, is it really effective? A systematic review of literature. Urol J 6:73–77
Thomas K, Smith NC, Hegarty N, Glass JM (2011) The Guy’s stone score – grading the complexity of percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures. Urology 78:277–281
Hyams ES, Bruhn A, Lipkin M, Shah O (2010) Heterogeneity in the reporting of disease characteristics and treatment outcomes in studies evaluating treatments for nephrolithiasis. J Endourol 24:1411–1414
Deters LA, Jumper CM, Steinberg PL, Pais VM (2011) Evaluating the definition of “stone free status” in contemporary urologic literature. Clin Nephrol 76:354–357
Denstedt JD, Clayman RV, Picus DD (1991) Comparison of endoscopic and radiological residual fragment rate following percutaneous nephrolithotripsy. J Urol 145:703–705
Tefekli A, Ali Karadag M, Tepeler K et al (2008) Classification of percutaneous nephrolithotomy complications using the modified Clavien grading system: looking for a standard. Eur Urol 53:184–190
de la Rosette JJ, Opondo D, Daels FP et al (2012) Categorisation of complications and validation of the Clavien score for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 62:246–255
Neto EA, Mitre AI, Gomes CM et al (2007) Percutaneous nephrolithotripsy with the patient in a modified supine position. J Urol 178:165–168
Zhou X, Gao X, Wen J, Xiao C (2008) Clinical value of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the supine position under the guidance of real-time ultrasound: report of 92 cases. Urol Res 36:111–114
Rana AM, Bhojwani JP, Junejo NN, Das Bhagia S (2008) Tubeless PCNL with patient in supine position: procedure for all seasons? – with comprehensive technique. Urology 71:581–585
Sergeyev I, Koi PT, Jacobs SL et al (2007) Outcome of percutaneous surgery stratified according to body mass index and kidney stone size. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 17:179–183
Koo BC, Burtt G, Burgess NA (2004) Percutaneous stone surgery in the obese: outcome stratified according to body mass index. BJU Int 93:1296–1299
El-Assmy AM, Shokeir AA, El-Nahas AR et al (2007) Outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy: effect of body mass index. Eur Urol 52:199–204
Pearle MS, Nakada SY, Womack JS, Kryger JV (1998) Outcomes of contemporary percutaneous nephrostolithotomy in morbidly obese patients. J Urol 160:669–673
Mazzucchi E, Vicenitni FC, Marchini GS et al (2012) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in obese patients: comparison between the prone and total supine position. J Endourol 26:1437–1442
Valdivia JG, Scarpa RM, Duvdevani M et al (2011) Supine versus prone position during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a report from the clinical research office of the endourological society percutaneous nephrolithotomy global study. J Endourol 25:1619–1625
Yamaguchi A, Skolarikos A, Buchholz NP et al (2011) Operating times and bleeding complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a comparison of tract dilation methods in 5,537 patients in the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Global Study. J Endourol 25:933–939
Falahatkar S, Maghaddam AA, Salehi M et al (2008) Complete supine percutaneous nephrolithotripsy comparison with the prone standard technique. J Endourol 22:2513–2517
Further Reading
Kumar P, Bach C, Kachrilas S et al (2012) Supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL): “in vogue” but in which position? BJU Int 110:E1018–E1021
Duty B, Okhunov Z, Smith A, Okeke Z (2011) The debate over percutaneous nephrolithotomy positioning: a comprehensive review. J Urol 186:20–25
Lardon R, Lacroix B, Lorin S, Mottet N (2012) Prone and supine position for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: is it necessary to change the operative technique? Prog Urol 22:154–158
Wu P, Wang L, Wang K (2011) Supine versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy for kidney calculi: a meta-analysis. Int Urol Nephrol 43:67–77
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer-Verlag France
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hoznek, A., Rode, J., Cracco, C.M., Scoffone, C.M. (2014). Prone Versus Supine PNL: Results and Published Series. In: Scoffone, C., Hoznek, A., Cracco, C. (eds) Supine Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and ECIRS. Springer, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-2-8178-0459-0_22
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-2-8178-0459-0_22
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Paris
Print ISBN: 978-2-8178-0359-3
Online ISBN: 978-2-8178-0459-0
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)