Hospital Volume Does Not Influence the Safety of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in England: A Population-Based Cohort Study

2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (8) ◽  
pp. 899-906 ◽  
Author(s):  
John M. Withington ◽  
Susan C. Charman ◽  
James N. Armitage ◽  
David Cromwell ◽  
William D. Finch ◽  
...  
2022 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Johannes Asplund ◽  
Fredrik Mattsson ◽  
Magdalena Plecka-Östlund ◽  
Sheraz R. Markar ◽  
Jesper Lagergren

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 308-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fu Ou-Yang ◽  
Nicholas C Hsu ◽  
Chiung-Hui Juan ◽  
Hsin-I Huang ◽  
Sin-Hua Moi ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Fang-Ting Chen ◽  
Fu-Chao Liu ◽  
Chih-Wen Cheng ◽  
Jr-Rung Lin ◽  
Huang-Ping Yu

The aim of this population-based cohort study was to explore postoperative renal outcomes of patients receiving pyelolithotomy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Data were retrieved from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. During the period from Jan 1, 1998, to Dec 31, 2012, there were 2549 and 21654 patients who underwent pyelolithotomy and PCNL, respectively. The postoperative incidence of new diagnosed end stage renal disease (ESRD) was statistically analyzed and compared between the pyelolithotomy and PCNL groups. The perioperative complications of two groups were also analyzed. In comparison to pyelolithotomy, PCNL achieved lower new diagnosed ESRD (1.38% versus 2.28%, p=0.0004). Patients receiving PCNL had significantly higher rates of preoperative hypertension, diabetes mellitus, pulmonary disease, cerebrovascular disease, and coronary artery disease. The hospital stay was shorter in PCNL groups compared with pyelolithotomy groups (8.31 days versus 12.59 days, p=0.0006). In conclusion, PCNL contributed to lower rates of new diagnosed ESRD and hospital stay when compared to pyelolithotomy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document