Skip to main content
Log in

Preoperative evaluation of pediatric kidney stone prior to percutaneous nephrolithotomy: is computed tomography really necessary?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Urolithiasis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of the study was to investigate the precise role of computed tomography (CT) in preoperative radiologic evaluation and surgical planning of kidney stone in children prior to percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL). A total of 113 pediatric patients (aged ≤18 years) undergoing PNL for renal stone(s) in three referral hospitals between March 2010 and August 2012 were retrospectively evaluated. Depending on the preoperative radiologic evaluation, patients were divided into two groups. Those evaluated with CT were classified as group-1 (n = 50) and the remaining cases undergoing intravenous urography (IVU) examination were classified as group-2 (n = 63). Patient- and procedure-related variables and perioperative measures were compared between the groups. The mean age, stone size and localization were similar in both groups (p = 0.07, p = 0.57, p = 0.6, respectively). Although the postoperative hemoglobin drop was found to be significantly higher in group-2 (1.5 ± 1.3 vs. 0.9 ± 0.6 g/dL, p = 0.005), the mean operation time, fluoroscopic screening time, access number, overall success and complication rates were comparable (p = 0.06, p = 0.94, p = 0.75, p = 041, and p = 0.41, respectively). However, the mean hospitalization time was significantly prolonged in group-2 than in group-1 (p = 0.03). Our findings clearly demonstrate that, despite the key role of preoperative CT in particular patients with anatomically abnormal kidneys, IVU is a valuable alternative imaging modality with comparable radiation doses in children.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Routh JC, Graham DA, Nelson CP (2010) Epidemiological trends in pediatric urolithiasis at United States freestanding pediatric hospitals. J Urol 184:1100–1104

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. VanDervoort K, Wiesen J, Frank R et al (2007) Urolithiasis in pediatric patients: a single center study of incidence, clinical presentation and outcome. J Urol 177:2300–2305

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Dwyer ME, Krambeck AE, Bergstralh EJ et al (2012) Temporal trends in incidence of kidney stones among children: a 25-year population based study. J Urol 188:247–252

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Faerber GJ (2001) Pediatric urolithiasis. Curr Opin Urol 11:385–389

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Taylor EN, Stampfer MJ, Curhan GC (2005) Obesity, weight gain, and the risk of kidney stones. JAMA 293:455–462

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Kieran K, Giel DW, Morris BJ et al (2010) Pediatric urolithiasis—does body mass index influence stone presentation and treatment? J Urol 184:1810–1815

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sarica K, Eryildirim B, Yencilek F et al (2009) Role of overweight status on stone-forming risk factors in children: a prospective study. Urology 73:1003–1007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dhar M, Denstedt JD (2009) Imaging in diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of stone patients. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis 16:39–47

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Park S, Pearle MS (2006) Imaging for percutaneous renal access and management of renal calculi. Urol Clin North Am 33:353–364

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Türk C, Knoll T, Petrik A et al (2013) EAU guidelines on urolithiasis. Eur Assoc Urol 2013:1–100

    Google Scholar 

  11. Brenner D, Elliston C, Hall E et al (2001) Estimated risks of radiation-induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 176:289–296

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Johnson EK, Faerber GJ, Roberts WW et al (2011) Are stone protocol computed tomography scans mandatory for children with suspected urinary calculi? Urology 78:662–666

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gedik A, Tutus A, Kayan D et al (2011) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in pediatric patients: is computerized tomography a must? Urol Res 39:45–49

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6,336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sampaio FJ (2000) Renal anatomy. Endourologic considerations. Urol Clin North Am 27:585–607

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Gupta M, Ost MC, Shah JB, McDougall EM, Smith AD (2007) Percutaneous management of the upper urinary tract. In: Kavoussi LR, Partin AW, Novick AC, Peters CA (eds) Campbell’s urology, Saunders Elsevier, Philadelphia, p 1526–1564

  17. Eisner BH, Cloyd J, Stoller ML (2009) Lower-pole fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous renal access: which calix is posterior? J Endourol 23:1621–1625

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lipkin ME, Mancini JG, Zilberman DE et al (2011) Reduced radiation exposure with the use of an air retrograde pyelogram during fluoroscopic access for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 25:563–567

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Atar M, Hatipoglu NK, Soylemez H et al (2013) Relationship between colon and kidney: a critical point for percutaneous procedures. Scand J Urol 47:122–125

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. El-Nahas AR, Shokeir AA, El-Assmy AM et al (2006) Colonic perforation during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: study of risk factors. Urology 67:937–941

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kachrilas S, Papatsoris A, Bach C et al (2012) Colon perforation during percutaneous renal surgery: a 10-year experience in a single endourology center. Urol Res 40:263–268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Gerspach JM, Bellman GC, Stoller ML et al (1997) Conservative management of colon injury following percutaneous renal surgery. Urology 49:831–836

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Goswami AK, Shrivastava P, Mukherjee A et al (2001) Management of colonic perforation during percutaneous nephrolithotomy in horseshoe kidney. J Endourol 15:989–991

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Goger E, Guven S, Gurbuz R et al (2012) Management of a colon perforation during pediatric percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 26:1118–1120

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Rice HE, Frush DP, Farmer D et al (2007) Review of radiation risks from computed tomography: essentials for the pediatric surgeon. J Pediatr Surg 42:603–607

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Söylemez H, Sancaktutar AA, Silay MS et al (2012) Knowledge and attitude of European urology residents about ionizing radiation. Urology 81:30–35

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Goske MJ, Applegate KE, Boylan J et al (2008) The ‘Image Gently’ campaign: increasing CT radiation dose awareness through a national education and awareness program. Pediatr Radiol 38:265–269

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ripollés T, Agramunt M, Errando J et al (2004) Suspected ureteral colic: plain film and sonography vs unenhanced helical CT. A prospective study in 66 patients. Eur Radiol 14:129–136

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abdulkadir Tepeler.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tepeler, A., Sancaktutar, A.A., Taskiran, M. et al. Preoperative evaluation of pediatric kidney stone prior to percutaneous nephrolithotomy: is computed tomography really necessary?. Urolithiasis 41, 505–510 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-013-0593-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-013-0593-4

Keywords

Navigation