Objective: To determine feasibility of an electromagnetic (EM) guidance system (Auris Health, Redwood City, CA) in obtaining percutaneous renal access among urologists and trainees of different experience levels. EM-guidance is appealing for access as it allows real time, 3-dimensional targeting without radiation. Few studies have explored this for percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and none have assessed its potential to decrease the learning curve in obtaining access using traditional techniques. Methods: Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee approval was obtained to compare EM-guided percutaneous access to fluoroscopic guided access in a porcine model. Voluntary participants included urology trainees and faculty. They were categorized as beginner (no prior primary percutaneous nephrolithotomyexperience), intermediate (10-100 prior) and advanced (>100). Each participant attempted an EM and fluoroscopic guided puncture. Primary outcome was successful puncture. Secondary outcomes included access time, fluoroscopy time, and number of attempts. Participants were limited to 3 attempts and 10 minutes total to obtain access using each technique. Results: Fourteen participants (6 beginners, 4 intermediates, and 4 experts) attempted 28 punctures. Overall success using EM-guidance was 93% compared to 71% using fluoroscopy (P =. 33). EM punctures had shorter access times (85 vs 255 seconds, P <.01) required fewer attempts (1 vs 2, P =. 04) and had decreased associated fluoroscopy times (1 vs 96 seconds, P <.01) excluding the initial retrograde pyelogram and guidance of the ureteroscope to the desired calyx. Beginners showed comparable success rates and outcomes relative to experts despite higher access times. Conclusion: EM-guidance is a promising new technique to decrease the learning curve of percutaneous access with high success rates and minimal radiation.
Bibliographical noteFunding Information:
Funding: The study was sponsored by Auris Health, Redwood City, CA. The authors retained full control of the design of the study, methods used, outcome parameters and results, analysis of data and production of the manuscript. There was no funding for drafting the manuscript. Dr. Borofsky's involvement in this research was separate from his obligations and responsibilities through the University of Minnesota.
PubMed: MeSH publication types
- Journal Article