Mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs flexible ureteroscopy for 1–2 cm lower pole renal stones: a randomised controlled trial

IF 4.4 2区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY BJU International Pub Date : 2024-10-22 DOI:10.1111/bju.16567
Hazem Elmansy, Moustafa Fathy, Amr Hodhod, Amer Alaref, Ruba Abdul Hadi, Loay Abbas, Husain Alaradi, Yasser Labib, Walid Shahrour, Ahmed S. Zakaria
{"title":"Mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs flexible ureteroscopy for 1–2 cm lower pole renal stones: a randomised controlled trial","authors":"Hazem Elmansy,&nbsp;Moustafa Fathy,&nbsp;Amr Hodhod,&nbsp;Amer Alaref,&nbsp;Ruba Abdul Hadi,&nbsp;Loay Abbas,&nbsp;Husain Alaradi,&nbsp;Yasser Labib,&nbsp;Walid Shahrour,&nbsp;Ahmed S. Zakaria","doi":"10.1111/bju.16567","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To compare the safety and efficacy of flexible ureteroscopy (f-URS) and ambulatory tubeless mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) in the treatment of 1–2 cm lower calyceal renal stones.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Patients and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Patients who underwent f-URS and mini-PCNL for the treatment of 1–2 cm lower calyceal renal stones between October 2020 and November 2023 were evaluated in a randomised controlled trial. A total of 72 patients were included in the study. All patients underwent a computed tomography renal colic scan preoperatively, on postoperative Day 1 (POD 1), and at 3 months follow-up. We compared perioperative outcomes, including operative time and hospital stay. Additionally, we evaluated follow-up outcomes, such as the stone-free rate (SFR) and complications. All patients were discharged home on the same operative day.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>There were no significant differences in preoperative baseline data between the two surgical groups. A significantly longer median operative time was reported in the mini-PCNL group (<i>P</i> = 0.04). The median hospital stay was 5 h and 4 h in the mini-PCNL and f-URS groups, respectively (<i>P</i> = 0.14). On POD 1, the SFR, defined as the absence of residual fragments measuring 0 cm, was 50% for mini-PCNL vs 11.1% for f-URS (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.001). When a total cut-off of &lt;0.4 cm was utilised, the SFR was 75% in the mini-PCNL group vs 22.2% in the f-URS cohort (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.001). At 3 months follow-up, the SFR remained favourable for mini-PCNL at 72.2% vs 37.1% for f-URS (<i>P</i> = 0.003), with a cut-off of 0 cm, and it increased to 86.1% for mini-PCNL vs 65.7% for f-URS (<i>P</i> = 0.04) when a total cut-off of &lt;0.4 cm was applied. There was no significant difference in postoperative complications between the two groups. Two patients (5.7%) in the f-URS group required re-treatment. [Correction added on 5 November 2024, after first online publication: Within the Results section, ‘&lt;4 cm’ has been corrected to ‘&lt;0.4 cm’.]</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Ambulatory tubeless mini-PCNL and f-URS are effective treatment options for 1–2 cm lower calyceal renal stones. Both techniques have a comparable hospital stay and complication rates, with a significantly better SFR with mini-PCNL.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":8985,"journal":{"name":"BJU International","volume":"135 3","pages":"437-445"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJU International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://bjui-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bju.16567","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To compare the safety and efficacy of flexible ureteroscopy (f-URS) and ambulatory tubeless mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) in the treatment of 1–2 cm lower calyceal renal stones.

Patients and Methods

Patients who underwent f-URS and mini-PCNL for the treatment of 1–2 cm lower calyceal renal stones between October 2020 and November 2023 were evaluated in a randomised controlled trial. A total of 72 patients were included in the study. All patients underwent a computed tomography renal colic scan preoperatively, on postoperative Day 1 (POD 1), and at 3 months follow-up. We compared perioperative outcomes, including operative time and hospital stay. Additionally, we evaluated follow-up outcomes, such as the stone-free rate (SFR) and complications. All patients were discharged home on the same operative day.

Results

There were no significant differences in preoperative baseline data between the two surgical groups. A significantly longer median operative time was reported in the mini-PCNL group (P = 0.04). The median hospital stay was 5 h and 4 h in the mini-PCNL and f-URS groups, respectively (P = 0.14). On POD 1, the SFR, defined as the absence of residual fragments measuring 0 cm, was 50% for mini-PCNL vs 11.1% for f-URS (P < 0.001). When a total cut-off of <0.4 cm was utilised, the SFR was 75% in the mini-PCNL group vs 22.2% in the f-URS cohort (P < 0.001). At 3 months follow-up, the SFR remained favourable for mini-PCNL at 72.2% vs 37.1% for f-URS (P = 0.003), with a cut-off of 0 cm, and it increased to 86.1% for mini-PCNL vs 65.7% for f-URS (P = 0.04) when a total cut-off of <0.4 cm was applied. There was no significant difference in postoperative complications between the two groups. Two patients (5.7%) in the f-URS group required re-treatment. [Correction added on 5 November 2024, after first online publication: Within the Results section, ‘<4 cm’ has been corrected to ‘<0.4 cm’.]

Conclusions

Ambulatory tubeless mini-PCNL and f-URS are effective treatment options for 1–2 cm lower calyceal renal stones. Both techniques have a comparable hospital stay and complication rates, with a significantly better SFR with mini-PCNL.

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 厘米下极肾结石的微型经皮肾镜取石术与柔性输尿管镜检查:随机对照试验
比较柔性输尿管镜检查(f-URS)和非卧床无管微型经皮肾镜碎石术(mini-PCNL)治疗 1-2 厘米下肾盏结石的安全性和有效性。
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
BJU International
BJU International 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
4.40%
发文量
262
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: BJUI is one of the most highly respected medical journals in the world, with a truly international range of published papers and appeal. Every issue gives invaluable practical information in the form of original articles, reviews, comments, surgical education articles, and translational science articles in the field of urology. BJUI employs topical sections, and is in full colour, making it easier to browse or search for something specific.
期刊最新文献
Response to comment by Semwal et al. Comment on 'Prostate zonal impact of 5α-reductase inhibitors on multiparametric MRI characteristics and detection of prostate cancer'. Area deprivation and cancer-specific mortality in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a statewide analysis. Intravesical therapy for recurrent urinary tract infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Correction to “Long‐term multicentre analysis of robot‐assisted radical cystectomy for non‐muscle‐invasive bladder cancer”
×
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:604180095
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