Comparison between standard, mini and ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy for single renal stones: a prospective study
- PMID: 35900584
- DOI: 10.1007/s00345-022-04107-y
Comparison between standard, mini and ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy for single renal stones: a prospective study
Abstract
Purpose: Based on the current trend of miniaturization of instruments used in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), it is necessary to compare different PCNL modalities regarding their access sheath size used. Thus, the safety and efficacy among standard, mini and ultra-mini PCNL (s-PCNL, m-PCNL, um-PCNL) were compared.
Methods: We performed a prospective, non-randomized trial between January 2018 and July 2020. Patients with stones classified as Guy's stone score grade I were included. The set-up for s-PCNL and m-PCNL included a 30 Fr and 22 Fr percutaneous tract, respectively. In both set-ups, an ultrasonic/ballistic lithotripter was utilized. In the case of um-PCNL, a 12 Fr percutaneous tract was established. A high-power laser was used for lithotripsy. Hemoglobin drop, complication rate, length of hospital stay (LOS), stone-free rate (SFR) and operation time were evaluated.
Results: A total of 84 patients, 28 patients per method, were evaluated. Hemoglobin drop was higher in the s-PCNL group when compared to m-PCNL (p = 0.008) and um-PCNL groups (p < 0.001), while um-PCNL group had the slightest hemoglobin drop. LOS was similar between s-PCNL group and m-PCNL group, but um-PCNL group required shorter hospital stay than the other two modalities (p < 0.001). The complication and transfusion rates as well as SFR did not differ between groups. Operation time in the um-PCNL set-up was longer compared to s-PCNL (p < 0.001) and m-PCNL (p = 0.011), whereas s-PCNL and m-PCNL did not differ significantly.
Conclusion: m-PCNL showed less hemoglobin drop, but similar operation time and SFR when compared to s-PCNL. um-PCNL showed even less hemoglobin drop, but the operation time was longer compared to the two other modalities.
Keywords: Mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy; Standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy; Stone disease; Ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy; Urolithiasis.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
References
-
- Sakr A, Salem E, Kamel M, Desoky E, Ragab A, Omran M et al (2017) Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs standard PCNL for management of renal stones in the flank-free modified supine position: single-center experience. Urolithiasis 45(6):585–589 - DOI
-
- Zhang H, Hong TY, Li G, Jiang N, Hu C, Cui X et al (2019) Comparison of the efficacy of ultra-mini PCNL, flexible ureteroscopy, and shock wave lithotripsy on the treatment of 1–2 cm lower pole renal calculi. Urol Int 102(2):153–159 - DOI
-
- Fayad AS, Elsheikh MG, Ghoneima W (2017) Tubeless mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for lower calyceal stones of ⩽2 cm: a prospective randomised controlled study. Arab J Urol 15(1):36–41 - DOI
-
- Bozzini G, Verze P, Arcaniolo D, Dal Piaz O, Buffi NM, Guazzoni G et al (2017) A prospective randomized comparison among SWL, PCNL and RIRS for lower calyceal stones less than 2 cm: a multicenter experience: a better understanding on the treatment options for lower pole stones. World J Urol 35(12):1967–1975 - DOI
-
- Proietti S, Giusti G, Desai M, Ganpule AP (2017) A critical review of miniaturised percutaneous nephrolithotomy: is smaller better? Eur Urol Focus 3(1):56–61 - DOI
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources