Abstract
W
The authors are to be congratulated for reporting their use of intraoperative PCT scan to minimize reintervention rates in PCNL. However, we would like to highlight a few points for consideration. First, percutaneous access was obtained by the interventional radiology team; why not by the surgeon doing PCNL, any specific concern? Second, the authors did not comment on the cost factor involved with using PCT. Third, why standard dose CT is used when it is already proven 2 that ultralow-dose CT and low-dose CT are effective techniques and yield high sensitivity and specificity?
We also want to ask, usually in the case of residual stones, extraction during the same surgery is possible but not always achievable through the same tract; how many patients require the use of other tracts? Also, whether PCT scan images were interpreted by surgeons or radiologists, or both? And how many patients underwent bilateral PCNL?
Finally, those patients who had undergone PCNL in the same renal unit within the previous 6 months were excluded; why so? Any specific reason for the same?
Authors have quoted that— “our purpose with this project is to reduce overall morbidity for our patients,” but still indirectly, they have evaluated the efficacy of intraoperative PCT, so to correctly evaluate it, all patients in the prospective arm should also undergo standard postoperative CT on postoperative day 1, we think so.
Finally, we would also like to congratulate the authors for their endeavors. This study will provide a pathway for future research.
Footnotes
Author Disclosure Statement
We declare no competing interests.
Funding Information
No funding was received for this article.