Collecting system percutaneous access using real-time tracking sensors: First pig model in vivo experience

Journal of Urology

Volumn 190, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 1932-1937

  Rodrigues, Pedro L ^a,b   Vilaça, João L ^a,b,d   Oliveira, Carlos ^a,b,c   Cicione, Antonio ^e   Rassweiler, Jens ^f   Fonseca, Jaime ^b   Rodrigues, Nuno F ^b,d   Correia Pinto, Jorge ^a,b,c   Lima, Estevão ^a,b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINHO   (Portugal)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MINHO   (Portugal)

^c HOSPITAL DE BRAGA   (Portugal)

^d Instituto Politcnico do Cvado e do Ave   (Portugal)

^e UNIVERSITY MAGNA GRAECIA OF CATANZARO   (Italy)

^f UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Imaging, three dimensional; Instrumentation; Kidney; Nephrostomy, percutaneous; Surgery, computer assisted

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; CATHETER TIP SENSOR; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTRONIC SENSOR; FEMALE; IN VIVO STUDY; KIDNEY; KIDNEY BIOPSY; NEEDLE; NEPHROLITHIASIS; NONHUMAN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PERCUTANEOUS NEPHROLITHOTOMY; PORCINE MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REAL TIME ELECTROMAGNETIC TRACKING SENSOR; URETER; URETEROSCOPY;

EID: 84888646369     PISSN: 00225347     EISSN: 15273792     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.05.042     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Worcester EM and Coe FL: Calcium kidney stones. N Engl J Med 2010; 363: 954.
2. Kalogeropoulou C, Kallidonis P and Liatsikos EN: Imaging in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 2009; 23: 1571.
3. Armitage JN, Irving SO and Burgess NA: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the United Kingdom: results of a prospective data registry. Eur Urol 2012; 61: 1188.
4. Preminger G, Assimos D, Lingeman J et al: Chapter 1: AUA guideline on management of staghorn calculi: diagnosis and treatment recommendations. J Urol 2005; 173: 1991.
5. Yuruk E, Tefekli A, Sari E et al: Does previous extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy affect the performance and outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy? J Urol 2009; 181: 663.
6. Guven S, Istanbulluoglu O, Gul U et al: Successful percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children: multicenter study on current status of its use, efficacy and complications using Clavien classification. J Urol 2011; 185: 1419.
7. de la Rosette JJMCH, Laguna MP, Rassweiler JJ et al: Training in percutaneous nephrolithotomyda critical review. Eur Urol 2008; 54: 994.
8. Miller J, Durack JC, Sorensen MD et al: Renal calyceal anatomy characterization with 3- dimensional in vivo computerized tomography imaging. J Urol 2013; 189: 562.
9. Zilberman DE, Lipkin ME, de la Rosette JJ et al: Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomydthe new standard of care? J Urol 2010; 184: 1261.
10. Bilen CY, Gunay M, Ozden E et al: Tubeless mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in infants and preschool children: a preliminary report. J Urol 2010; 184: 2498.
11. Duty B, Okhunov Z, Smith A et al: The debate over percutaneous nephrolithotomy positioning: a comprehensive review. J Urol 2011; 186: 20.
12. De Sio M, Autorino R, Quarto G et al: Modified supine versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal stones treatable with a single percutaneous access: a prospective randomized trial. Eur Urol 2008; 54: 196.
13. Autorino R and Giannarini G: Prone or supine: is this the question? Eur Urol 2008; 54: 1216.
14. Ghani KR, Patel U and Anson K: Computed tomography for percutaneous renal access. J Endourol 2009; 23: 1633.
15. Mozer P, Troccaz J and Stoianovici D: Urologic robots and future directions. Curr Opin Urol 2009; 19: 114.
16. Desai MM, Grover R, Aron M et al: Robotic flexible ureteroscopy for renal calculi: initial clinical experience. J Urol 2011; 186: 563.
17. Rassweiler JJ, Müller M, Fangerau M et al: iPad-assisted percutaneous access to the kidney using marker-based navigation: initial clinical experience. Eur Urol 2012; 61: 628.
18. Teber D, Guven S, Simpfendörfer T et al: Augmented reality: a new tool to improve surgical accuracy during laparoscopic partial nephrectomy? Preliminary in vitro and in vivo results. Eur Urol 2009; 56: 332.
19. Bader MJ, Gratzke C, Seitz M et al: The "all-seeing needle": initial results of an optical puncture system confirming access in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 2011; 59: 1054.
20. Perrin DP, Vasilyev NV, Novotny P et al: Image guided surgical interventions. Curr Prob Surg 2009; 46: 730.
21. Cleary K and Peters TM: Image-guided interventions: technology review and clinical applications. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2010; 12: 119.
22. Mancini JG, Raymundo EM, Lipkin M et al: Factors affecting patient radiation exposure during percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Urol 2010; 184: 2373.
23. Li X, Liao S, Yu Y et al: Stereotactic localisation system: a modified puncture technique for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Urol Res 2012; 40: 395.
24. Karami H, Mohammadi R and Lotfi B: A study on comparative outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in prone, supine, and flank positions. World J Urol, Epub ahead of print June 13, 2012.
25. Ritter M, Rassweiler MC, Häcker A et al: Laserguided percutaneous kidney access with the Uro Dyna-CT: first experience of three-dimensional puncture planning with an ex vivo model. World J Urol, Epub ahead of print March 4, 2012.
26. Lazarus J and Williams J: The Locator: novel percutaneous nephrolithotomy apparatus to aid collecting system punctureda preliminary report. J Endourol 2011; 25: 747.
27. Haber G-P, Crouzet S, Remer EM et al: Stereotactic percutaneous cryoablation for renal tumors: initial clinical experience. J Urol 2010; 183: 884.
28. Yaniv Z, Wilson E, Lindisch D et al: Electromagnetic tracking in the clinical environment. Med Physics 2009; 36: 876.