Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for adult renal transplant de novo graft lithiasis: a single center analysis and systematic review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVE: Graft stones in renal transplant recipients pose a unique challenge, finding effective interventions to ensure optimal graft function and patient well-being. Various methods of stone clearance have been described for graft stones, including percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). While PCNL is a promising approach for managing graft stones, specific outcomes and associated characteristics for this approach have not been comprehensively evaluated before. This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the use of PCNL as the primary intervention of graft stones by assessing stone-free rates (SFR), treatment impact on graft function, and perioperative complications. METHODS: A retrospective clinical audit was performed for all transplants performed in a single center from 2007 to 2022, which included all graft lithiasis patients who were treated with PCNL. Both perioperative parameters and post-operative outcomes were collected. In addition, a systematic review including articles from MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science yielded 18 full-text articles published between 1/1/2000 and 15/11/2023. The results pertaining to patients who underwent PCNLs for graft stones were cross-referenced and thoroughly evaluated. The review encompassed a comprehensive analysis of clinical data, postoperative outcomes, and procedural details. The protocol for the systematic review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023486825). RESULTS: In our center, 6 graft lithiasis patients were treated with PCNL. The initial SFR was 83.3%. SFR at 3 months and 1 year were both 100.0%. SFR at 3 years was 66.7%. Other centers reported initial SFR of 82.6-100.0% (interquartile range). SFR at 3 months, 1 year, 3 years was not well reported across the included studies. Incidence of graft lithiasis ranged from 0.44%-2.41%. Most common presentations at diagnosis were oliguria/anuria/acute kidney injury and asymptomatic. Reported complications included blood loss, transient hematuria, high urine output, sepsis, and damage to surrounding structures. The most commonly reported metabolic abnormalities in transplant lithiasis patients included hyperuricemia and hyperparathyroidism. CONCLUSION: PCNL is a practical and efficient choice for addressing graft lithiasis, demonstrating excellent stone clearance and minimal perioperative complications. These findings show the importance of PCNL as a primary intervention in this complex patient population.

Does witness type affect the chance of receiving bystander CPR in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest?

OBJECTIVES: The relationship between the bystander witness type and receipt of bystander CPR (BCPR) is not well understood. Herein we compared BCPR administration between family and non-family witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). BACKGROUND: In many communities, interventions in the past decade have contributed to an increased receipt of BCPR, for example in Singapore from 15% to 60%. However, BCPR rates have plateaued despite sustained and ongoing community-based interventions, which may be related to gaps in education or training for various witness types. The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between witness type and BCPR administration. METHODS: Singapore data from 2010-2020 was extracted from the Pan-Asian Resuscitation Outcomes Study (PAROS) network registry (n = 25,024). All adult, layperson witnessed, non-traumatic OHCAs were included in this study. RESULTS: Of 10,016 eligible OHCA cases, 6,895 were family witnessed and 3,121 were non-family witnessed. After adjustment for potential confounders, BCPR administration was less likely for non-family witnessed OHCA (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.75, 0.93). After location stratification, non-family witnessed OHCAs were less likely to receive BCPR in residential settings (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.66, 0.85). In non-residential settings, there was no statistically significant association between witness type and BCPR administration (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.88, 1.39). Details regarding witness type and bystander CPR were limited. CONCLUSION: This study found differences in BCPR administration between family and non-family witnessed OHCA cases. Elucidation of witness characteristics may be useful to determine populations that would benefit most from CPR education and training.