Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Invited review: the tale of ECIRS (Endoscopic Combined IntraRenal Surgery) in the Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia position

  • Invited Review
  • Published:
Urolithiasis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Modern-day percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) has undergone considerable evolution, mainly driven by the improvement in access techniques, endoscopic instrumentation technology, lithotripsy devices and drainage management. The introduction of the supine and supine-modified positions is also part of this evolution, enabling comfortable and safe procedures from an anaesthesiological point of view, and an easy combined retrograde surgery [Endoscopic Combined IntraRenal Surgery (ECIRS)], allowing tailoring of the procedure on the patient, the dynamic anatomy of the collecting system and the urolithiasis. The conceptual value of ECIRS extends beyond the single diagnostic and active advantages due to the simultaneous contribution of the flexible retrograde ureteroscopy: the merit consists in the promotion of the versatile attitude of the urologist, and in the fulfillment of a personalized stone management. ECIRS has no pretensions of superiority, but for sure is a new safe and effective way of interpreting PNL, in the hands of an experienced surgical team.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rupel E, Brown R (1941) Nephroscopy with removal of stone following nephrostomy for obstructive calculus anuria. J Urol 46:177–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Harris RD, McLaughlin AP 3rd, Harrell JH (1975) Percutaneous nephroscopy using fiberoptic bronchoscope: removal of renal calculus. Urology 6:367–369

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ferstrom I, Johansson B (1976) Percutaneous pyelolithotomy. A new extraction technique. Scand J Urol Nephrol 10:257–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Marshall V (1964) Fiberoptics in urology. J Urol 91:110–114

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lyon ES, Banno JJ, Schoenberg HW (1979) Transurethral ureteroscopy in men using juvenile cystoscopy equipment. J Urol 122:152–153

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Keating MA, Heney NM, Young HH 2nd et al (1986) Ureteroscopy: the initial experience. J Urol 135:689–693

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Streem SB, Lammert G (1992) Long-term efficacy of combination therapy for struvite staghorn calculi. J Urol 147:563–566

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Traxer O, Letendre J (2014) Extracorporeal lithotripsy endoscopically controlled by ureterorenoscopy (LECURS): a new concept for the treatment of kidney stones-first clinical experience using digital ureterorenoscopes. World J Urol 32:715–721

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Zeng G, Zhao Z, Wu W, Zhong W (2014) Combination of debulking single-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy followed by retrograde intrarenal surgery for staghorn stones in solitary kidneys. Scand J Urol 48:295–300

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lawson RK, Murphy JB, Taylor AJ, Jacobs SC (1983) Retrograde method for percutaneous access to kidney. Urology 22:580–582

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hunter PT, Hawkins IF, Finlayson B et al (1983) Hawkins-Hunter retrograde transcutaneous nephrostomy: a new technique. Urology 22:583–587

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kawahara T, Ito H, Terao H et al (2012) Ureteroscopy assisted retrograde nephrostomy: a new technique for percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). BJU Int 110:588–590

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Wynberg JB, Paik LJ, Odom BD et al (2014) Body mass index predicts outcome of ureteroscopy-assisted retrograde nephrostomy for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 28:1071–1077

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lehman T, Bagley DH (1988) Reverse lithotomy: modified prone position for simultaneous nephroscopic and ureteroscopic procedures in women. Urology 32:529–531

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Grasso M, Lang G, Taylor FC (1995) Flexible ureteroscopically assisted percutaneous renal access. Tech Urol 1:39–43

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Grasso M, Lang G, Loisides P et al (1995) Endoscopic management of the symptomatic caliceal diverticular calculus. J Urol 153:1878–1881

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Scarpa RM, Cossu FM, De Lisa A et al (1997) Severe recurrent ureteral stricture: the combined use of an anterograde and retrograde approach in the prone splitleg position without X-rays. Eur Urol 31:254–256

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ibarluzea JG, Gamarra MG, Leibar A, Pereira JG (2014) The evolution from prone to supine PNL and from supine PNL to ECIRS: the basque history of endourology. In: Scoffone CM, Hoznek A, Cracco CM (eds) Supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy and ECIRS, 1st edn. Springer, France, pp 15–23

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Ibarluzea Gonzàlez G, Gamarra Quintanilla M, Gallego Sànchez JA et al (2001) Percutaneous kidney lithotripsy. Clinical course, indications and current methodology in our lithotripsy unit. Arch Esp Urol 54:951–969

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ibarluzea G, Scoffone CM, Cracco CM et al (2007) Supine Valdivia and modified lithotomy position for simultaneous anterograde and retrograde endourological access. BJU Int 100:233–236

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Landman J, Venkatesh R, Lee DI et al (2003) Combined percutaneous and retrograde approach to staghorn calculi with application of the ureteral access sheath to facilitate percutaneous nephrostolithotomy. J Urol 169:64–67

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Marguet CG, Springhart WP, Tan YH et al (2005) Simultaneous combined use of flexible ureteroscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy to reduce the number of access tracts in the management of complex renal calculi. BJU Int 96:1097–1100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Borin JF (2008) Prone retrograde laser lithotripsy facilitates endoscope-guided percutaneous renal access for staghorn calculi: Two scopes are better than one. J Endourol 22:1881–1883

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sountoulides PG, Kaufmann OG, Louie MK et al (2009) Endoscopy-guided percutaneous nephrostolithotomy: benefits of ureteroscopic access and therapy. J Endourol 23:1649–1654

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Scoffone CM, Cracco CM, Cossu M et al (2008) Endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia position: a new standard for percutaneous nephrolithotomy? Eur Urol 54:1393–1403

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Cracco CM, Scoffone CM, Poggio M, Scarpa RM (2010) The patient position for PNL: does it matter? Arch Ital Urol Androl 82:30–31

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Scoffone CM, Cracco CM, Poggio M, Scarpa RM (2010) Endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery for high burden renal stones. Arch Ital Urol Androl 82:41–42

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Cracco CM, Scoffone CM, Scarpa RM (2011) New developments in percutaneous techniques for simple and complex branched renal stones. Curr Opin Urol 21:154–160

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Cracco CM, Scoffone CM (2011) ECIRS (endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery) in the Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia position: a new life for percutaneous surgery? World J Urol 29:821–827

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Serra S, Corona A, De Lisa A (2012) Endoscopic combined intra renal surgery (ECIRS) in prone position. Urologia 79 Suppl 19:121–124

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hoznek A, Rode J, Ouzaid I et al (2012) Modified supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy for large kidney and ureteral stones: technique and results. Eur Urol 61:164–170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Nuño de la Rosa I, Palmero JL, Miralles J et al (2014) A comparative study of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in supine position and endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery with flexible instrument. Actas Urol Esp 38:14–20

    Google Scholar 

  33. Scoffone CM, Hoznek A, Cracco CM (2014) Supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy and ECIRS, 1st edn. Springer, France

    Book  Google Scholar 

  34. Hamamoto S, Yasui T, Okada A et al (2014) Endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery for large calculi: simultaneous use of flexible ureteroscopy and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy overcomes the disadvantageous of percutaneous nephrolithotomy monotherapy. J Endourol 28:28–33

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Patel RM, Okhunov Z, Clayman RV, Landman J (2017) Prone versus supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy: what is your position? Curr Opin Urol 18:26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-017-0676-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Adeyoju AAB, Sutcliffe N (2014) Anaesthesia for supine and modified supine PNL. In: Scoffone CM, Hoznek A, Cracco CM (eds) Supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy and ECIRS, 1st edn. Springer, France, pp 79–88

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  37. Papatsoris A, Masood J, El-Husseiny T et al (2009) Improving patient positioning to reduce complications in prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 23:831–832

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Karami H, Rezaei AR, Mazloomfard MM et al (2012) Effect of surgical position on patient’s arterial blood gases during percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Urol J 9:553–556

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Khoshrang H, Falahatkar S, Ilat S et al (2012) Comparative study of hemodynamics electrolyte and metabolic changes during prone and complete supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Nephrourol Mon 4:622–628

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Basiri A, Soltani MH, Kamranmanesh M et al (2013) Neurologic complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Korean J Urol 54:172–176

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Siev M, Motamedinia P, Leavitt D et al (2015) Does peak inspiratory pressure increase in the prone position? An analysis related to body mass index. J Urol 194:1302–1306

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Ozayar E, Gulec H, Bayraktaroglu M et al (2016) Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery and percutaneous nephrolithotomy: from the view of an anaesthesiologist. J Endourol 30:184–188

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Daels FPJ, Gonzalez MS (2014) Intraoperative complications: how to avoid them? In: Scoffone CM, Hoznek A, Cracco CM (eds) Supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy and ECIRS, 1st edn. Springer, France, pp 265–277

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  44. Miano R, Scoffone C, De Nunzio C et al (2010) Position: prone or supine is the issue of percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 24:931–938

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Cracco CM, Alken P, Scoffone CM (2016) Positioning for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Curr Opin Urol 26:81–87

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Liu L, Zheng S, Xu Y, Wei Q (2010) Systematic review and meta-analysis of percutaneous nephrolithotomy for patients in the supine versus prone position. J Endourol 24:1941–1946

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Wu P, Wang l, Wang K (2011) Supine versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy for kidney calculi: a metaanalysis. Int Urol Nephrol 43:67–77

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Yuan DB, Liu YD, Rao HF et al (2016) Supine versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy for kidney calculi: a meta-analysis. J Endourol 30:754–764

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Mak DKC, Smith Y, Buchholz N, El-Husseini T (2016) What is better in percutaneous nephrolithotomy—prone or supine? A systematic review. Arab J Urol 14:101–107

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Ghani KR, Andonian S, Bultitude M et al (2016) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: update, trands, and future directions. Eur Urol 70:382–390

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Cracco CM, Knoll T, Liatsikos EN et al (2017) Rigid-only versus combined rigid and flexible percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review. Minerva Urol Nefrol 69:330–341

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Sofer M, Barghouthy Y, Bar-Yosef Y et al (2017) Upper calyx accessibility through a lower calyx access is not influenced by morphometric and clinical factors in supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 31:452–456

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Scoffone CM, Cracco CM (2016) Editorial Comment to Risk factors of systemic inflammation response syndrome after endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in the modified Valdivia position. Int J Urol 23:692–693

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Low RK (1999) Nephroscopy sheath characteristics and intrarenal pelvic pressure: human kidney model. J Endourol 13:205–208

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Clayman RV (2000) Nephroscopy sheath characteristics and intrarenal pressure: human kidney model. J Urol 163:1616

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Falahatkar S, Allahkhah A, Soltanipour S (2011) Supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy: pro. Urol J 8:257–264

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Lezrek M, Bazine K, Ammani A et al (2011) Needle renal displacement technique for the percutaneous approach to the superior calix. J Endourol 25:1723–1726

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Yazici CM, Kayhan A, Dogan C (2014) Supine or prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy: do anatomical changes make it worse? J Endourol 28:10–16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Sofer M, Giusti G, Proietti S et al (2016) Upper calyx approachability through a lower calyx access for prone versus supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Urol 195:377–382

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Hoznek A, Daels FPJ, Kimuli MNT et al (2014) ECIRS: patient positioning and organization of the operating room. In: Scoffone CM, Hoznek A, Cracco CM (eds) Supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy and ECIRS, 1st edn. Springer, France, pp 109–125

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  61. Lojanapiwat B (2013) The ideal puncture approach for PCNL: fluoroscopy, ultrasound or endoscopy? Indian J Urol 29:208–213

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Scoffone CM, Ingrosso M, Cracco CM (2017) ECIRS (endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery) in the Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia position. J Urol 197(4):e1284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. De la Rosette J, Assimos D, Desai M et al (2011) The clinical research office of the endourological society percutaneous nephrolithotomy global study: indications, complications, and outcomes in 5803 patients. J Endourol 25:11–17

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Seitz C, Desai M, Haecker A et al (2012) Incidence, prevention, and management of complications following percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 61:146–158

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Türk C, Petřík A, Sarica K et al (2016) EAU guidelines on interventional treatment for urolithiasis. Eur Urol 69:475–482

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Friedlander JI, Duty BD, Smith AD, Okeke Z (2012) Percutaneous nephrostolithotomy: an assessment of costs for prone and Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia positioning. Urology 80:771–775

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Knoll T, Daels F, Desai J et al (2017) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: technique. World J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2001-0

    Google Scholar 

  68. Curry D, Srinivasan R, Kucheria R et al (2017) Supine PCNL in the Galdakao modified Valdivia position—a high volume single centre experience. J Endourol. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2017.0064

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Cottolengo Hospital of Torino, via Cottolengo 9, 10152, Torino, Italy

    Cesare Marco Scoffone & Cecilia Maria Cracco

Authors
  1. Cesare Marco Scoffone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cecilia Maria Cracco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cesare Marco Scoffone.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Dr. Cesare Marco Scoffone is consultant for Boston Scientific, Coloplast Porgés, Cook Medical, DBI, Olympus, Promed, Storz Medical (same for Lumenis, tutor for courses for Menarini and Recordati in the past). Dr. Cecilia Maria Cracco is tutor for courses of Boston Scientific (same for Menarini and Recordati in the past).

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Funding

The present manuscript received no funding.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Scoffone, C.M., Cracco, C.M. Invited review: the tale of ECIRS (Endoscopic Combined IntraRenal Surgery) in the Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia position. Urolithiasis 46, 115–123 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-017-1015-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-017-1015-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation