Literature DB >> 35107612

Ultramini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery in the treatment of 10-30 mm calculi: a randomized controlled trial.

Soumendra N Datta1, Ramandeep S Chalokia1, K W Wing1, K Patel2, R Solanki2, Janak Desai3.   

Abstract

The surgical management of renal stones 10-30 mm is usually performed with percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Standard form of percutaneous nephrolithotomy has paved the way for miniaturized PCNL in many centres. We wanted to evaluate the efficacy, safety and the cost-effectiveness of ultramini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMP) versus RIRS in the treatment of renal stones with stone burden 10-30 mm. Patients with renal stone burden 10-30 mm were prospectively randomized into either UMP or RIRS. The demographic data, stone characteristic, operative time and cost of the equipment were recorded. The stone free status, analgesic requirement, deterioration of the renal function and hemoglobin and the postoperative complications as per Clavein-Dindo grade were recorded. One hundred and fifty patients met inclusion criteria. Out of these 98 underwent UMP and 46 RIRS. Six withdrew the consent before the procedure. Mean stone size was comparable in either of the groups. Mean laser time and stone extraction time was significantly less for UMP compared to RIRS (41.17 min versus 73.58 min p < 0.0001). Mean consumable costs in the UMP group were considerably less at US$45.73 compared to the RIRS group at $423.11 (p < 0.0001). The stone free rates at 1 month of follow-up were 100% for UMP group and 73% for RIRS group. There were insignificant changes to mean hemoglobin and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in all patients and the average length of the stay was similar in both the groups. The postoperative complications revealed Grade I and II rate of 10% in the UMP group and 35% in the RIRS group, respectively. We concluded that UMP to be safe, effective and more economical to the RIRS for renal stones up to 3 cm in size.Trial registered with ISRCTN registry ID ISRCTN20935105, Retrospective.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Minimal invasive management of renal calculi; Randomized controlled trial; Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS); Ultramini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMP)

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35107612     DOI: 10.1007/s00240-022-01304-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urolithiasis        ISSN: 2194-7228            Impact factor:   3.436


  8 in total

1.  Ultra-mini PCNL versus flexible ureteroscopy: a matched analysis of treatment costs (endoscopes and disposables) in patients with renal stones 10-20 mm.

Authors:  Martin Schoenthaler; Konrad Wilhelm; Simon Hein; Fabian Adams; Daniel Schlager; Ulrich Wetterauer; Azad Hawizy; Andreas Bourdoumis; Janak Desai; Arkadiusz Miernik
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-01-23       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SMP) vs retrograde intrarenal surgery for the treatment of 1-2 cm lower-pole renal calculi: an international multicentre randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Guohua Zeng; Tao Zhang; Madhu Agrawal; Xiang He; Wei Zhang; Kefeng Xiao; Hulin Li; Xuedong Li; Changbao Xu; Sixing Yang; Jean J de la Rosette; Junhong Fan; Wei Zhu; Kemal Sarica
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2018-07-26       Impact factor: 5.588

3.  Epidemiology of urolithiasis: an update.

Authors:  Alberto Trinchieri
Journal:  Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab       Date:  2008-05

Review 4.  Tract Sizes in Miniaturized Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Systematic Review from the European Association of Urology Urolithiasis Guidelines Panel.

Authors:  Yasir Ruhayel; Abdulkadir Tepeler; Saeed Dabestani; Steven MacLennan; Aleš Petřík; Kemal Sarica; Christian Seitz; Andreas Skolarikos; Michael Straub; Christian Türk; Yuhong Yuan; Thomas Knoll
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2017-02-23       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 5.  A Critical Review of Miniaturised Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Is Smaller Better?

Authors:  Silvia Proietti; Guido Giusti; Mahesh Desai; Arvind P Ganpule
Journal:  Eur Urol Focus       Date:  2017-05-12

6.  Role of Residual Fragments on the Risk of Repeat Surgery after Flexible Ureteroscopy and Laser Lithotripsy: Single Center Study.

Authors:  Viacheslav Iremashvili; Shuang Li; Kristina L Penniston; Sara L Best; Sean P Hedican; Stephen Y Nakada
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Does a smaller tract in percutaneous nephrolithotomy contribute to less invasiveness? A prospective comparative study.

Authors:  Liao-Yuan Li; Xin Gao; Ming Yang; Jie-Fang Li; Hai-Bin Zhang; Wen-Feng Xu; Zhe Lin
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2009-10-02       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  Ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMP): one more armamentarium.

Authors:  Janak Desai; Ronak Solanki
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2013-07-11       Impact factor: 5.588

  8 in total
  1 in total

1.  Comparison of flexible ureteroscopy and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment for renal calculi larger than 2 cm: a matched-pair analysis.

Authors:  Guangda Lv; Kai Wang; Zhiwei Zhang; Changkuo Zhou; Yan Li; Dongqing Zhang
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2022-06-15       Impact factor: 2.861

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.