A comparison of balloon and amplatz dilators in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a retrospective evaluation

Özçift, Burak; Bal, Kaan; Dinçel, Çetin

doi:10.5152/tud.2013.058

Cited by 6 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The fee of the balloon dilation group turned into more than an amplatz institution, that turned into reported by using Burak Oczift and collages in a study became posted through the Turkish magazine of urology 19 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy tract dilatation techniques comparison (Balloon vs. Amplatz): Our Experience in Middle East.

Abu-Qamar¹,

Al-Naser²,

Al-Majali³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is a gold widespread minimally invasive technique for the remedy of huge renal stones > 2 cm. Our intention is to review the versions among the Balloon and Amplatz dilatation of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) tract exploitation peri- and postoperative variables and make clear which technique is efficient.Methods: 600 sufferers who underwent PCNLs among (1-April 2012 and 20-September 2018) in our Urology Center had been listed all through this retrospective look at, and divided into 2 groups: (group1) balloon tract dilatation (300 sufferers) and (group2) Amplatz serial fascial (ASF) dilatation (300 sufferers). Therefore, the demographic and categorical statistics were compared between each team.Statistical evaluation used: SPSS software version twenty-four, T-test.Results: operative time (balloon vs. Amplatz group: (85 ± 32 vs. 86.5 ± 31) mins; P= zero.073), preoperative Hematocrit value (41.5 ± 8.2 vs. 40.three ± 9.4; P= 0.088), postoperative Hematocrit cost (36.1 ± 2.2 vs. 34.6 ± three.4; P= 0.023), blood transfusion levels (10.6% vs. 12.1%; P= 0.002), tract dilatation trials (20.4% vs. 22.6%; P= 0.051), stone clearance price (78.three% vs. 77.8%; P= 0.083), and therefore, the versions regarding the price have been higher slightly in balloon cluster while within the opportunity variables had been statistically insignificant besides blood transfusion rate and postoperative hospital live.Conclusion: The balloon dilatation is price effective than amplatz method in manner of postoperative hospital live length and blood transfusion, whereas most of the other diverse factors like safety, operative period, achievement rate, and stone clearance price; they gave comparable consequences.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy tract dilatation techniques comparison (Balloon vs. Amplatz): Our Experience in Middle East.

Abu-Qamar¹,

Al-Naser²,

Al-Majali³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…21 The remaining five studies did not verify this finding and therefore could not reach the same conclusion. [16][17][18][19][20] Pooled analysis also suggests that there is no statistically significant difference in terms of transfusion rate between the two groups (OR=0.69, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.01, p=0.06), overall. No significant heterogeneity was observed (I 2 =0%, p=0.67) (see figure 2B for further details).…”

Section: Literature Searchmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…According to our eligibility criteria, one RCT and five CCTs were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. [16][17][18][19][20][21] Basic study design characteristics and quality assessments of the included studies are provided in table 1. In each of the included studies, groups were relatively homogeneous in terms of stone location, size and shape.…”

Section: Literature Searchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All studies reported transfusion rates [16][17][18][19][20][21] but only one reported that balloon dilation can significantly reduce the need for blood transfusion. 21 The remaining five studies did not verify this finding and therefore could not reach the same conclusion.…”

Section: Literature Searchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Five studies reported complication rates [16][17][18][19][20] and only one reported having observed a significant difference in the rate of complications between these two dilation techniques. This meta-analysis also appears to confirm that complications rates may be similar for each of the components of PNCL analysed here (OR=0.74, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.08) although this was not a significant finding (p=0.12).…”

Section: Complication Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Balloon versus Amplatz for tract dilation in fluoroscopically guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo compare the safety and efficacy of balloon and Amplatz for tract dilation in fluoroscopically guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).MethodEMBASE, PUBMED, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for pertinent studies up until 30 October 2019. Pooled effects were calculated as ORs with 95% CIs or mean differences (MD) with 95% CIs. Endpoints included postoperative decrease in haemoglobin, transfusion rate, complication rate, successful dilation rate, stone-free rate, fluoroscopy time, access time, total operation time and length of postoperative hospitalisation (LPH). Bonferroni’s correction was intercalated to reduce the likelihood of making a meta-analytical false positive.ResultsOne randomised controlled trial and five controlled clinical trials were included, which involved 1317 patients in total. We found a lower drop in postoperative haemoglobin for patients receiving balloon dilation compared with those in the Amplatz group (MD=−0.21, 95% CI −0.33 to 0.09, p=0.0005; Bonferroni correction a=0.005). Access time in the balloon group was also, on average, 2.61 min shorter than the Amplatz group (MD=−2.61, 95% CI −4.20 to 1.01, p=0.001; Bonferroni correction a=0.005). No significant differences were identified between the two dilation methods in terms of transfusion rate, complication rate, successful dilation rate, stone-free rate, fluoroscopy time, total operation time and LPH.ConclusionBalloon dilation is a safe and effective tract dilation technique for access creation during fluoroscopically guided PCNL. Both of methods have similar success rates although balloon dilation is associated with significantly less postoperative haemoglobin decline and shorter access time. Therefore, balloon dilation appears to be the superior tract dilation technique, but further confirmatory research is required to confirm these findings.

show abstract

Comparison of Dilation Methods in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Which One Is More Successful?

Nalbant

Karakoyunlu

Yeşil

et al. 2016

Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A comparison of balloon and amplatz dilators in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a retrospective evaluation

Cited by 6 publications

References 24 publications

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy tract dilatation techniques comparison (Balloon vs. Amplatz): Our Experience in Middle East.

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy tract dilatation techniques comparison (Balloon vs. Amplatz): Our Experience in Middle East.

Balloon versus Amplatz for tract dilation in fluoroscopically guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Comparison of Dilation Methods in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Which One Is More Successful?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About