Urolithiasis DOI 10.1007/s00240-014-0733-5
ORIGINAL PAPER
Retro‑renal colon: role in percutaneous access Govind Sharma · Dharmendra Kumar Jangid · S. S. Yadav · Rajeev Mathur · Vinay Tomar
Received: 28 March 2014 / Accepted: 7 October 2014 © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014
Abstract Introduction Upper urinary tract is accessed for various procedures. The maximum numbers of procedures are carried out in prone position. Perforation of the colon is a well-known complication. The incidence of retrorenal colon varies from 10–20 % in prone position, but the chances of injury is around 0.05. So there were no significant incidences of retro-renal colon observed
Urolithiasis Table 1 Side distribution of retro-renal colon between sexes in supine and prone
Table 2 Frequency of retrorenal colon according to various levels and chances of injuries in prone position
Table 3 Age groups of patients those having retro-renal colon
Bold values indicate that maximum number of patients were >50 years of age
Supine
Prone
Male
Female
Total
Male
Female
Total
Bilateral retro-renal colon Right side Left side
None 2 2
None 2 1
None 4 3
1 (2 kidneys) 2 12
4 (8 kidneys) 0 5
5 (10) 2 17
Total
4
3
7
15 (16)
9 (13)
24 (29)
Bilateral cases
Right side
Left side
Chances of injury to colon
Superior pole Hilum Inferior pole
1 (2 kidneys) 2 (4 kidneys) 2 (4 kidneys)
2
2 5 10
Present Present Present only in 4 cases out of 14
Total (29 kidneys)
10
2
17
Age group
Supine
Prone
Male
Female
Total
Male
Female
Total
0–10 11–20 21–30 31–40 41–50 >50
0 0 0 1 1 2
0 0 1 0 0 2
0 0 1 1 1 4
0 0 1 1 1 12
0 1 1 1 0 6
0 1 2 1 2 18
Total
4
3
7
15
9
24
between sexes according to side and with change in position (i.e. supine or prone). As we are not doing percutaneous procedures in supine procedures so the chance of injury to colon was studied only in prone position. We also observed retro-renal colon in respect to superior, inferior and hilum of kidney (Table 2). Patients in which retro-renal colons detected were divided into following age groups (Table 3). Mean age of patients in prone position, those who had retro-renal colon was 57.33. By applying unpaired t test, p
ORIGINAL PAPER
Retro‑renal colon: role in percutaneous access Govind Sharma · Dharmendra Kumar Jangid · S. S. Yadav · Rajeev Mathur · Vinay Tomar
Received: 28 March 2014 / Accepted: 7 October 2014 © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014
Abstract Introduction Upper urinary tract is accessed for various procedures. The maximum numbers of procedures are carried out in prone position. Perforation of the colon is a well-known complication. The incidence of retrorenal colon varies from 10–20 % in prone position, but the chances of injury is around 0.05. So there were no significant incidences of retro-renal colon observed
Urolithiasis Table 1 Side distribution of retro-renal colon between sexes in supine and prone
Table 2 Frequency of retrorenal colon according to various levels and chances of injuries in prone position
Table 3 Age groups of patients those having retro-renal colon
Bold values indicate that maximum number of patients were >50 years of age
Supine
Prone
Male
Female
Total
Male
Female
Total
Bilateral retro-renal colon Right side Left side
None 2 2
None 2 1
None 4 3
1 (2 kidneys) 2 12
4 (8 kidneys) 0 5
5 (10) 2 17
Total
4
3
7
15 (16)
9 (13)
24 (29)
Bilateral cases
Right side
Left side
Chances of injury to colon
Superior pole Hilum Inferior pole
1 (2 kidneys) 2 (4 kidneys) 2 (4 kidneys)
2
2 5 10
Present Present Present only in 4 cases out of 14
Total (29 kidneys)
10
2
17
Age group
Supine
Prone
Male
Female
Total
Male
Female
Total
0–10 11–20 21–30 31–40 41–50 >50
0 0 0 1 1 2
0 0 1 0 0 2
0 0 1 1 1 4
0 0 1 1 1 12
0 1 1 1 0 6
0 1 2 1 2 18
Total
4
3
7
15
9
24
between sexes according to side and with change in position (i.e. supine or prone). As we are not doing percutaneous procedures in supine procedures so the chance of injury to colon was studied only in prone position. We also observed retro-renal colon in respect to superior, inferior and hilum of kidney (Table 2). Patients in which retro-renal colons detected were divided into following age groups (Table 3). Mean age of patients in prone position, those who had retro-renal colon was 57.33. By applying unpaired t test, p
