In the Treatment of Lower Pole Kidney Stones Between 1-2 cm in Children, Which is the Best Approach? Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery or Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy.

IF 1 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Medical Bulletin of Sisli Etfal Hospital Pub Date : 2024-09-30 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.14744/SEMB.2024.49225
Yusuf Arikan, Enes Dumanli, Yusuf Alper Kara, Ali Kumcu, Mehmet Zeynel Keskin, Ulas Can Erdogan
{"title":"In the Treatment of Lower Pole Kidney Stones Between 1-2 cm in Children, Which is the Best Approach? Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery or Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy.","authors":"Yusuf Arikan, Enes Dumanli, Yusuf Alper Kara, Ali Kumcu, Mehmet Zeynel Keskin, Ulas Can Erdogan","doi":"10.14744/SEMB.2024.49225","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Kidney stones are treated with many methods, but there is no consensus on which method should be preferred for 1-2 cm lower renal stones. In our study, we aimed to investigate the results of mini (Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy) PCNL and (Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery) RIRS in lower renal pole 1-2 cm stones.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-four mini PCNL and 55 RIRS patients were included in the study. Demographic data of the patients and information about stones on Non-Computed Tomography (NCCT) were recorded. Stone-free status (SFR), need for additional treatment and complications of both methods were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Operative time was 55.2±20.8 min in mini PCNL and 70.7±36.5 min in RIRS, which was statistically significantly lower (p=0.002). Length of hospital stay was 2.4±1.5 days in the mini PCNL and 1.3±0.7 days in the RIRS, which was statistically significantly longer (p=0.011). In the postoperative 1st month and 3rd month stone-free rates (SFR) were higher in the mini PCNL group. While the 1st month SFR was 91.6% and 54.5%, the 3rd month stone-free rates were 95.8% vs. 69.1%, respectively (p<0.001). The need for re-treatment was statistically lower in the mini PCNL group (p<0.001). In terms of complications, the incidence of complications was 16.6% (pain in 2 patients, fever in 1 patient, need for blood transfusion in 1 patient) in the mini PCNL group and 21.8% (pain in 2 patients, fever in 8 patients, sepsis in 2 patients) in the RIRS group. There was a significant difference between the two groups (p=0.008).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Mini PCNL has a higher SFR, less need for re-treatment and fewer complications.</p>","PeriodicalId":42218,"journal":{"name":"Medical Bulletin of Sisli Etfal Hospital","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11472195/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Bulletin of Sisli Etfal Hospital","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/SEMB.2024.49225","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Kidney stones are treated with many methods, but there is no consensus on which method should be preferred for 1-2 cm lower renal stones. In our study, we aimed to investigate the results of mini (Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy) PCNL and (Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery) RIRS in lower renal pole 1-2 cm stones.

Methods: Twenty-four mini PCNL and 55 RIRS patients were included in the study. Demographic data of the patients and information about stones on Non-Computed Tomography (NCCT) were recorded. Stone-free status (SFR), need for additional treatment and complications of both methods were compared.

Results: Operative time was 55.2±20.8 min in mini PCNL and 70.7±36.5 min in RIRS, which was statistically significantly lower (p=0.002). Length of hospital stay was 2.4±1.5 days in the mini PCNL and 1.3±0.7 days in the RIRS, which was statistically significantly longer (p=0.011). In the postoperative 1st month and 3rd month stone-free rates (SFR) were higher in the mini PCNL group. While the 1st month SFR was 91.6% and 54.5%, the 3rd month stone-free rates were 95.8% vs. 69.1%, respectively (p<0.001). The need for re-treatment was statistically lower in the mini PCNL group (p<0.001). In terms of complications, the incidence of complications was 16.6% (pain in 2 patients, fever in 1 patient, need for blood transfusion in 1 patient) in the mini PCNL group and 21.8% (pain in 2 patients, fever in 8 patients, sepsis in 2 patients) in the RIRS group. There was a significant difference between the two groups (p=0.008).

Conclusion: Mini PCNL has a higher SFR, less need for re-treatment and fewer complications.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
治疗 1-2 厘米儿童下极肾结石的最佳方法是什么?逆行肾内手术还是迷你经皮肾镜取石术?
目的:治疗肾结石的方法有很多,但对于 1-2 厘米的肾下段结石,哪种方法更可取还没有达成共识。在我们的研究中,我们旨在调查迷你(经皮肾镜取石术)PCNL 和(逆行肾内手术)RIRS 治疗下肾极 1-2 厘米结石的效果:研究纳入了 24 例小型 PCNL 和 55 例 RIRS 患者。研究记录了患者的人口统计学数据和非计算机断层扫描(NCCT)显示的结石信息。比较了两种方法的无结石状态(SFR)、额外治疗需求和并发症:迷你 PCNL 的手术时间为 55.2±20.8分钟,RIRS 为 70.7±36.5分钟,在统计学上明显更短(P=0.002)。迷你 PCNL 的住院时间为 2.4±1.5天,RIRS 为 1.3±0.7天,住院时间明显更长(P=0.011)。迷你 PCNL 组术后第 1 个月和第 3 个月的无结石率(SFR)更高。迷你 PCNL 组术后第 1 个月和第 3 个月的无结石率(SFR)分别为 91.6% 和 54.5%,而第 3 个月的无结石率则分别为 95.8% 和 69.1%(p 结论:迷你 PCNL 的 SFR 更高:迷你 PCNL 的 SFR 更高,再次治疗的需求更少,并发症更少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Bulletin of Sisli Etfal Hospital
Medical Bulletin of Sisli Etfal Hospital MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
自引率
16.70%
发文量
41
期刊最新文献
An Analytical Comparison of Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma Patients Manifested with or without Graves' Disease. Can Galanin Be Used as a Marker of Microvascular Dysfunction in Prehypertensives? Can Laryngeal Mask Airway be the First Choice for Tracheal Stenosis Surgery? A Historical Cohort Study. Coexistence of Thyroglossal Cyst and Thyroid Disease in Adults: Surgical Outcomes From A Single Center. Comparative Analysis of Pain and Duration in Panretinal Photocoagulation: Navilas Laser versus Conventional Laser in Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1