The association between novel negative pressure ureteroscopic lithotripsy combined with flexible ureteroscopy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy on stone-free rates: implications for clinical practice and policy.
{"title":"The association between novel negative pressure ureteroscopic lithotripsy combined with flexible ureteroscopy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy on stone-free rates: implications for clinical practice and policy.","authors":"Shuangning Liu, Yu Dai, Fan Jiang, Yatao Jia","doi":"10.1007/s00240-024-01645-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The correlation between novel negative pressure ureteroscopic lithotripsy (NP-URL) combined with flexible ureteroscopy (FU) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) on stone-free rates (SFR) remains unclear. There is a lack of evidence from Chinese populations regarding the relationship between SFR and NP-URL combined with FU (NP-URL-FU) versus PCNL. We aimed to assess the association between NP-URL-FU and PCNL on SFR. We conducted a cohort study involving 166 participants with 2-4 cm kidney stones. Data on SFR (7 days and 2 months) were collected from all participants. Logistic regression analysis was used to substantiate the research objectives. NP-URL-FU versus PCNL showed an 86% decrease in the 7-day SFR (OR = 0.14, 95% CI 0.07-0.29). The results remained stable even after adjusting for potential confounders. However, no statistically significant association was found between the surgical method and the 2-month SFR. Further exploratory subgroup analyses showed no significant interactions, with all P values > 0.05. Among patients with 2-4 cm kidney stones, NP-URL-FU was associated with a lower risk of incident 7-day SFR than PCNL. However, no statistically significant difference was found in the long-term stone removal rate. Therefore, NP-URL-FU may be a viable alternative surgical option for patients seeking minimally invasive procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":23411,"journal":{"name":"Urolithiasis","volume":"52 1","pages":"140"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11464563/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urolithiasis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-024-01645-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The correlation between novel negative pressure ureteroscopic lithotripsy (NP-URL) combined with flexible ureteroscopy (FU) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) on stone-free rates (SFR) remains unclear. There is a lack of evidence from Chinese populations regarding the relationship between SFR and NP-URL combined with FU (NP-URL-FU) versus PCNL. We aimed to assess the association between NP-URL-FU and PCNL on SFR. We conducted a cohort study involving 166 participants with 2-4 cm kidney stones. Data on SFR (7 days and 2 months) were collected from all participants. Logistic regression analysis was used to substantiate the research objectives. NP-URL-FU versus PCNL showed an 86% decrease in the 7-day SFR (OR = 0.14, 95% CI 0.07-0.29). The results remained stable even after adjusting for potential confounders. However, no statistically significant association was found between the surgical method and the 2-month SFR. Further exploratory subgroup analyses showed no significant interactions, with all P values > 0.05. Among patients with 2-4 cm kidney stones, NP-URL-FU was associated with a lower risk of incident 7-day SFR than PCNL. However, no statistically significant difference was found in the long-term stone removal rate. Therefore, NP-URL-FU may be a viable alternative surgical option for patients seeking minimally invasive procedures.
期刊介绍:
Official Journal of the International Urolithiasis Society
The journal aims to publish original articles in the fields of clinical and experimental investigation only within the sphere of urolithiasis and its related areas of research. The journal covers all aspects of urolithiasis research including the diagnosis, epidemiology, pathogenesis, genetics, clinical biochemistry, open and non-invasive surgical intervention, nephrological investigation, chemistry and prophylaxis of the disorder. The Editor welcomes contributions on topics of interest to urologists, nephrologists, radiologists, clinical biochemists, epidemiologists, nutritionists, basic scientists and nurses working in that field.
Contributions may be submitted as full-length articles or as rapid communications in the form of Letters to the Editor. Articles should be original and should contain important new findings from carefully conducted studies designed to produce statistically significant data. Please note that we no longer publish articles classified as Case Reports. Editorials and review articles may be published by invitation from the Editorial Board. All submissions are peer-reviewed. Through an electronic system for the submission and review of manuscripts, the Editor and Associate Editors aim to make publication accessible as quickly as possible to a large number of readers throughout the world.