PURPOSE: To compare the outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for 15 to 20 mm lower-pole (LP) renal calculi by evaluating stone-free rates and associated complications. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The records of 79 patients who underwent either PCNL (n=42) or RIRS (n=37) by standard techniques for 15 to 20 mm LP renal calculi were reviewed retrospectively. RESULTS: In the PCNL group, the stone-free rate was 92.8% (39/42 patients); this rate increased to 97.6% after a second intervention (shockwave lithotripsy in one and RIRS in one). After a single RIRS procedure, 33 of 37 (89.2%) patients were completely stone free. Two patients needed an additional procedure (rigid ureteroscopy in one and RIRS in one), after which they were all completely stone free, resulting in an overall success rate of 94.6%. Two patients had asymptomatic residual fragments <7 mm in the LP of the kidney, and these patients had been followed with ultrasonography of the kidney. For complications, there were minimal differences in both procedures, except for hemorrhage (necessitated transfusion) in three patients who were treated with PCNL. The overall stone-free rates and complication rates for PCNL were higher, but the differences were not statistically significant. Operative time was significantly longer in the RIRS group, and postoperative hospital stay was significantly longer in PCNL group. CONCLUSION: PCNL and RIRS are safe and effective methods for medium-sized LP calculi. For selected patients, RIRS may represent an alternative therapy to PCNL, with acceptable efficacy and low morbidity.
PURPOSE: To compare the outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for 15 to 20 mm lower-pole (LP) renal calculi by evaluating stone-free rates and associated complications. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The records of 79 patients who underwent either PCNL (n=42) or RIRS (n=37) by standard techniques for 15 to 20 mm LPrenal calculi were reviewed retrospectively. RESULTS: In the PCNL group, the stone-free rate was 92.8% (39/42 patients); this rate increased to 97.6% after a second intervention (shockwave lithotripsy in one and RIRS in one). After a single RIRS procedure, 33 of 37 (89.2%) patients were completely stone free. Two patients needed an additional procedure (rigid ureteroscopy in one and RIRS in one), after which they were all completely stone free, resulting in an overall success rate of 94.6%. Two patients had asymptomatic residual fragments <7 mm in the LP of the kidney, and these patients had been followed with ultrasonography of the kidney. For complications, there were minimal differences in both procedures, except for hemorrhage (necessitated transfusion) in three patients who were treated with PCNL. The overall stone-free rates and complication rates for PCNL were higher, but the differences were not statistically significant. Operative time was significantly longer in the RIRS group, and postoperative hospital stay was significantly longer in PCNL group. CONCLUSION: PCNL and RIRS are safe and effective methods for medium-sized LP calculi. For selected patients, RIRS may represent an alternative therapy to PCNL, with acceptable efficacy and low morbidity.
Authors: Theodoros Tokas; Martin Habicher; Daniel Junker; Thomas Herrmann; Jan Peter Jessen; Thomas Knoll; Udo Nagele Journal: World J Urol Date: 2016-10-13 Impact factor: 4.226
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
Authors: Hanan Goldberg; Dor Golomb; Yariv Shtabholtz; Shlomi Tapiero; German Creiderman; Avi Shariv; Jack Baniel; David Lifhshitz Journal: World J Urol Date: 2017-07-29 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Mustafa Kirac; Ömer Faruk Bozkurt; Lutfi Tunc; Cagri Guneri; Ali Unsal; Hasan Biri Journal: Urolithiasis Date: 2013-03-13 Impact factor: 3.436
Authors: Orhan Karakoç; Ahmet Karakeçi; Tunç Ozan; Fatih Fırdolaş; Cihat Tektaş; Şehmus Erdem Özkarataş; İrfan Orhan Journal: Turk J Urol Date: 2015-06