Back
Non-Moderated Poster Abstract
Eposter Presentation
 
Accept format: PDF. The file size should not be more than 5MB
 
Accept format: PNG/JPG/WEBP. The file size should not be more than 2MB
 
Submitted
Abstract
Comparative analyzing of learning curve for prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy in urology resident training program
Podium Abstract
Clinical Research
Training and Education
Author's Information
8
No more than 10 authors can be listed (as per the Good Publication Practice (GPP) Guidelines).
Please ensure the authors are listed in the right order.
Russia
Yuriy Kim Aleksandrovich dockimyura@gmail.com Botkin Hospital Department of Urology Moscow Russia *
Tyhtasin B. Mahmydov tasintr@mail.ru Botkin Hospital Department of Urology Moscow Russia
Nikita S. Lykin nlukin071@gmail.com Botkin Hospital Department of Urology Moscow Russia
Vladislav V. Vaganov vaganov14stunt@mail.ru Botkin Hospital Department of Urology Moscow Russia
Mariya A. Yurlova mari.yurlova@inbox.ru Botkin Hospital Department of Urology Moscow Russia
Vigen A. Malkhasyan vigenmalkhasyan@gmail.com A.I. Evdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry Department of Urology Moscow Russia
Che-Hsueh Yang b101098093@tmu.edu.tw Chang Bing Show Chwan Memorial Hospital Department of Urology Changhua Taiwan
Dmitry Yu. Pushkar pushkardm@mail.ru A.I. Evdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry Department of Urology Moscow Russia
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Abstract Content
This article attempts to provide a comprehensive review of the learning objectives and importance of the prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) technique.
We prospectively reviewed the cases of prone PCNL between February 2024 and November 2024. We divided to 2 groups: residents between 4 and 5 years (Group 1) and endourologist (Group 2). The 4-5 year resident started to perform PCNL for the first time, while the endourologist started to perform prone PCNL 3 years ago.
Access, fluoroscopy, and operation time were higher in Group 1 shorter in Group 3 (p < 0.001). Postoperative length of stay and the need for additional treatment were found to be shorter (p < 0.001), and the stone-free rate (SFR) higher in Group 1 (p < 0.001) than Group 3. The highest complication rates were observed in Group 1 (p = 0.002). SFR rate increased as the number of cases increased in Group 1 patients. Success was stable after 34-47 cases in terms of SFR. The most complications were observed in Group 1 and the least in Group 2.
In 4-5 year residents, access time and fluoroscopy time decrease with experience. SFR is higher after 34-47 cases for 4-5-year residents.
Learning curve; Percutaneous nephrolithotomy; Renal stone; prone position; Urology resident
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1157
 
Presentation Details