Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Staghorn Calculi: A Single Center's Experience over 15 Years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for staghorn calculi is one of the more challenging endourologic procedures. Although excellent stone-free rates are universally reported in the literature, complication rates vary widely, especially related to the need for blood transfusion. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of PCNL for patients with staghorn calculi in a large series of patients at a single, tertiary referral, endourologic stone center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between July 1990 and December 2005, 1338 patients underwent PCNL for renal stone disease at our institution. Among this group, 509 procedures were performed for patients with a partial or complete staghorn calculus. Data analysis included procedure time, length of hospital stay, number of access tracts, transfusion rates, other early and late complications, and stone-free status. RESULTS: Mean patient age was 53.8 years (range 4-84 yrs). The average procedure time was 104 minutes. Sixteen percent of the cases needed multiple access tracts (range 2-5), with the lower calix being the most commonly used in 64.1%, followed by the upper calix in 18.5% and the middle calix in 17.4%. Various intracorporeal lithotriptors were used, including ultrasound, pneumatic, electrohydraulic, and holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser. The transfusion rate among this group was 0.8%. There was no statistically significant difference in transfusion rates (0.7%-1.2% P = 0.24) or other major complications in patients who were treated with either a single tract or among those needing multiple tracts. Stone-free rates at hospital discharge and at 3 months follow-up were 78% and 91%, respectively. CONCLUSION: PCNL is a safe and effective procedure in the management of staghorn calculi, with outcomes similar to those reported for percutaneous management of smaller volume nonstaghorn stones. Attention to accurate tract selection and placement as well as possession of the full array of endourologic equipment are essential to achieving an excellent outcome.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".