Background and Purpose:Ideal treatment modality for patients with large impacted proximal ureteral stone remains controversial. We compared laparoscopic transperitoneal ureterolithotomy (Lap-TPUL) and semirigid ureteroscopy for large proximal ureteric stones to evaluate their efficacy and safety.Patients and Methods:From November 2012 to December 2014, we enrolled 122 patients with large (≥1.5 cm) proximal ureteral stone in the study. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: Group A (60 patients), retrograde ureteroscopic lithotripsy using a semirigid ureteroscope; Group B (62 patients), transperitoneal LU (Lap-TPUL).Results:The overall stone-free rate was 71.6% and 93.5% for Group A and Group B respectively (P = 0.008). Auxiliary procedure rate was higher in Group A than in Group B (27.3% vs. 5.6%). The complication rate was 11.2% in Group B versus 25% in Group A. Mean procedure time was higher in laparoscopy group as compared to ureterorenoscopy (URS) groups (84.07 ± 16.80 vs. 62.82 ± 12.71 min). Hospital stay was 4.16 ± 0.67 days in laparoscopy group and 1.18 ± 0.38 days in URS group (P < 0.0001).Conclusion:Laparoscopic transperitoneal ureterolithotomy is a minimally invasive, safe and effective treatment modality and should be recommended to all patients of impacted large proximal stones, which are not amenable to URS or extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy or as a primary modality of choice especially if patient is otherwise candidate for open surgery.

Introduction:Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the treatment of choice for staghorn and large renal stones. The success of PCNL is highly related to optimal renal access. Upper calyceal puncture being more difficult and more demanding have relatively few studies presented.Aims and Objectives:This prospective study was carried out to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of upper calyceal versus lower calyceal puncture for the removal of complex renal stones through PCNL.Materials and Methods:A total of 94 patients underwent PCNL for complex renal stone in our institute. Fifty-one of them underwent lower calyceal, while 43 underwent upper calyceal puncture. The two approaches are compared as per total duration of surgery, intraoperative blood loss, infundibular/pelvic tear, rate of complete clearance and rate of postoperative complications (pulmonary, bleeding, fever and sepsis, etc.).Observation and Results:In our study, the success rate was 76.47% for those in the lower, 90.70% for those in the upper calyceal access group. Thoracic complications (hydrothorax) occurred to 1 patient in upper calyceal supracostal access group. Bleeding requiring blood transfusion happened to 5 patients in lower calyceal access and 1 in upper calyceal group.Conclusion:In our study for the management of complex renal calculi, we conclude that in a previously unoperated kidney, upper calyceal puncture through subcostal or supra 12th rib is a feasible option minimizing lung/pleural rupture and gives a better clearance rate. We suggest that with due precautions, there should not be any hesitation for upper calyceal puncture in indicated patients.