Literature DB >> 21477212

Prospective comparative study of miniperc and standard PNL for treatment of 1 to 2 cm size renal stone.

Shashikant Mishra1, Rajan Sharma, Chandrapraksh Garg, Abraham Kurien, Ravindra Sabnis, Mahesh Desai.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: • To evaluate the results of miniperc vis-à-vis standard PNL in the treatment of stones of 1-2 cm in size. Miniperc may represent a reasonable procedure in patients with nonbulky urolithiasis offering a similar outcome as standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) with advantage of reduced morbidity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: • 55 procedures including 27 miniperc and 28 standard PNL were performed for renal stones 1-2 cm in size. Pediatric patient, active urinary tract infection, renal malformation, uncorrected coagulopathy and morbid obesity patients were excluded from the study. • The parameters studied were demography, operative time, postoperative analgesic requirement, hemoglobin drop, complications and stone clearance.
RESULTS: • Mean tract size was 18.2 ± 2 F (15-20) and 26.8 ± 2 F (24-30), P value <0.0001 in the miniperc and standard PNL, respectively. Holmium LASER and pneumatic lithotripter were the main energy sources used in miniperc and standard PNL, respectively. • Miniperc operative time was longer than that of standard PNL (45.2 ± 12.6 vs 31 ± 16.6 min, P= 0.0008 respectively). • Conversely, there was an advantage of miniperc over standard PNL in terms of a significantly reduced hemoglobin drop (0.8 ± 0.9 vs 1.3 ± 0.4 gram%, P= 0.01), analgesic requirement (55.4 ± 50 vs 70.2 ± 52 mg tramadol, P= 0.29) and hospital stay (3.2 ± 0.8 vs 4.8 ± 0.6 days, P ≤ 0.001), respectively. • Intra- operative conversion of the procedure into a tubeless PNL was significantly more in the miniperc group (P ≤ 0.001). The miniperc and standard PNL group had clearance rates of 96% and 100%, respectively at 1 month follow up.
CONCLUSIONS: • This study demonstrated significant advantages of the miniperc procedure in terms of reduced bleeding leading to a tubeless procedure and reduced hospital stay. • The stone free rates and the complications were similar in either group.
© 2011 THE AUTHORS. BJU INTERNATIONAL © 2011 BJU INTERNATIONAL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21477212     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09936.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  67 in total

1.  Is standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy still the standard treatment modality for renal stones less than three centimeters?

Authors:  Ömer Sarılar; Faruk Özgör; Onur Küçüktopçu; Burak Uçpınar; Mehmet Fatih Akbulut; Metin Savun; Zafer Gökhan Gürbüz; Murat Binbay
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2017-05-03

2.  PCNL in the twenty-first century: role of Microperc, Miniperc, and Ultraminiperc.

Authors:  Arvind P Ganpule; Amit Satish Bhattu; Mahesh Desai
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-10-15       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  The vacuum cleaner effect in minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy.

Authors:  André P Nicklas; David Schilling; Markus J Bader; Thomas R W Herrmann; Udo Nagele
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-04-02       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  Supracostal access for miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy: comparison of supracostal and infracostal approaches.

Authors:  Faruk Ozgor; Abdulkadir Tepeler; Ismail Basibuyuk; Onur Kucuktopcu; Yunus Kayali; Fatih Yanaral; Murat Binbay
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2017-03-30       Impact factor: 3.436

Review 5.  Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: technique.

Authors:  Thomas Knoll; Francisco Daels; Janak Desai; Andras Hoznek; Bodo Knudsen; Emanuele Montanari; Cesare Scoffone; Andreas Skolarikos; Keiichi Tozawa
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2017-01-25       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  Systematic review and cumulative analysis of the managements for proximal impacted ureteral stones.

Authors:  Tuo Deng; Yiwen Chen; Bing Liu; M Pilar Laguna; Jean J M C H de la Rosette; Xiaolu Duan; Wenqi Wu; Guohua Zeng
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-11-14       Impact factor: 4.226

7.  Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy: an alternative to retrograde intrarenal surgery and shockwave lithotripsy.

Authors:  Stephan Kruck; Aristoteles G Anastasiadis; Thomas R W Herrmann; Ute Walcher; Mohamed F Abdelhafez; André P Nicklas; Lillian Hölzle; David Schilling; Jens Bedke; Arnulf Stenzl; Udo Nagele
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2012-10-11       Impact factor: 4.226

8.  Treatment of upper urinary calculi with Chinese minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a single-center experience with 12,482 consecutive patients over 20 years.

Authors:  Guohua Zeng; Zanlin Mai; Zhijian Zhao; Xun Li; Wen Zhong; Jian Yuan; Kaijun Wu; Wenqi Wu
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2013-04-25       Impact factor: 3.436

9.  RIRS versus mPCNL for single renal stone of 2-3 cm: clinical outcome and cost-effective analysis in Chinese medical setting.

Authors:  Jiahua Pan; Qi Chen; Wei Xue; Yonghui Chen; Lei Xia; Haige Chen; Yiran Huang
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2012-12-23       Impact factor: 3.436

10.  Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of lower-pole renal stones with a diameter of smaller than 15 mm.

Authors:  Mustafa Kirac; Ömer Faruk Bozkurt; Lutfi Tunc; Cagri Guneri; Ali Unsal; Hasan Biri
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2013-03-13       Impact factor: 3.436

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.