Evaluation of mini-PCNL and RIRS for renal stones 1–2 cm in an economically challenged setting: A prospective cohort study

Mahmood, Sarwar Noori; Ahmed, Choman J.; Tawfeeq, Hewa; Bapir, Rawa; Fakhralddin, Saman Salih; Abdulla, Berwn A.; Buchholz, Noor

doi:10.1016/j.amsu.2022.104235

Cited by 9 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For mini-PCNL, S.N. Mahmood et al reported a Hb decline mean ± SD 0.78 ± 0.49, which is somewhat larger than our study [4].…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 84%

“…Mahmood et al found that the mini-PCNL technique had a significantly shorter operative time (39.58 ± 24.7). Their study included 120 patients who had the same stone characteristics as ours, but they measured the operative time after turning the patient to a prone position, whereas we measured it from the moment anaesthesia was induced [4].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In contrast, the conventional PCNL patient' s fever (38.1 °C) had no effect on the pre-detected hospitalisation term. Ten patients (8.3%) experienced early post-operative fever, according to Noori et al; all on them spontaneously recovered in less than a day [4].…”

Section: обмен опытомmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…We are attempting in this study to find a reliable replacement for E.S.W.L. and R.I.R.S in treating small renal stones that is safe, efficient, and reliable with the shortest post-operative stay period [4]. Treatment on a single small renal stone with multiple procedures carries much suffering with pain, and hospitalization is necessary [5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of the safety and the reliability of day case mini-PCNL in treatment of renal stones 1 to 2 cm

Mostafa,

El-zayat,

Omer

et al. 2024

Ambulatornaya khirurgiya

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction. The capacity to execute mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) as a day case procedure in the treatment on renal stones measuring between one and two centimetres is being assessed in this study. Mini-PCNL has been employed more and more in the treatment on renal stones with favourable results in terms on stone clearance and low morbidities.Aim. To find a reliable replacement for E.S.W.L. and R.I.R.S in treating small renal stones that is safe, efficient, and reliable with the shortest post-operative stay period.Materials and methods. Seventy patients underwent surgery for kidney stones that ranged in size from 1 to 2 cm and had densities greater than 1000 H.U. They were split into two groups: group B received mini-PCNL and group A received regular PCNL. Both procedures were carried out while the patients was in the prone position. In group A, we fragmented the material with an electrohydraulic lithotripter and removed the resulting fragments using forceps. In contrast, group B employed a 30 w Quanta Holmium laser in dusting mode (0.5 j and 15 Hz) with 550 um laser fibre and relied on our exit plan for the double-J stent implantation, which avoided the necessity for a nephrostomy tube.Results. Operation duration was significantly longer in mini-PCNL group (p < 0.001). Intraoperative extravasation and its severity were non-significantly less frequent in mini-PCNL group (p > 0.05). All patients operated with mini-PCNL underwent double j stent, while the other group included only two patients who necessitated double J insertion insertion, and the remaining 33 patients depended on the insertion on a nephrostomy tube together with a ureteric catheter.Conclusion: Mini-PCNL is a dependable day case method that is safe for treating tiny kidney stones. Larger sample size studies could be required to confirm mini-PCNL as a day case technique.

show abstract

“…For mini-PCNL, S.N. Mahmood et al reported a Hb decline mean ± SD 0.78 ± 0.49, which is somewhat larger than our study [4].…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 84%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: обмен опытомmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of the safety and the reliability of day case mini-PCNL in treatment of renal stones 1 to 2 cm

Mostafa,

El-zayat,

Omer

et al. 2024

Ambulatornaya khirurgiya

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another newest consensus on retrograde intrarenal surgery gave a recommendation that a stone less than 20 mm in diameter is the best indication for retrograde intrarenal surgery.Thus, for those 1.5 to 2.0 cm stones in diameter, experts did not give a decisive conclusion according to the newest recommendation. In addition to the expert consensus, we found a few studies comparing PCNL and RIRS for renal or ureteral stones less than 2.0 cm in diameter [23][24][25]. However, there are no studies that speci cally focus on upper ureteral stones of 1.5-2.0 cm in diameter, which means that there is no evidence to prove which procedure is better for stones of this size.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy or flexible ureteral lithotripsy, which one is better for patients with upper ureteral calculi of 1.5-2.0cm in diameter

Chen¹,

Hu²,

Yu³

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of flexible ureteral lithotripsy (FURSL) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in the treatment of upper ureteral impacted calculi (1.5cm to 2.0cm in diameter). Methods From December 2018 to October 2022, 104 patients with calculi in the upper ureter received percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL)or flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (FURSL) in our institution. The clinical data of the patients in the two groups were retrospectively searched. Stone removal rate, operation time, blood loss, postoperative pain score, postoperative inflammatory factor, postoperative complication rates were compared between the two groups. Results A total of 104 patients were included in the study. The stone clearance rate and the secondary surgery rate were 88.89% and 7.41% in the FURSL group, the figures were 97.96% and 2.0% in the PCNL group (p=0.067, 0.198).Compared to patients in FURSL group, patients in the PCNL group had shorter operation time(PCNL 71.81±18.94minutes vs FURSL 86.80±22.49minutes, p=0.0004), fewer complications(PCNL 20.37% vs FURSL 6.12%), and lower postoperative inflammatory factor（p=0.0004）, yet they got more hemoglobin drop（PCNL 13.14±9.81g/L vs FURSL 4.77±3.55g/L, p<0.0001）, higher postoperative pain scores (p=0.0017) in the first three postoperative days. Conclusion Both FURSL and PCNL were effective methods for treating upper ureteral stones of 1.5-2.0cm in diameter given that there was an extremely high stone clearance rate and a very low secondary surgery rate. While PCNL effectively reduced operative time, postoperative inflammatory factor and the risk of postoperative complications, it had more hemoglobin drop and postoperative pain scores comparing with FURSL.

show abstract

Flexible Ureteroscopy with a Tip-bendable Suction Ureteral Access Sheath Versus Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Treatment of 2–3-cm Renal Stones: Study Protocol for an International, Multicenter, Randomized, Parallel-group, Noninferiority Trial

Zhu,

Ann Chai,

et al. 2024

European Urology Open Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluation of mini-PCNL and RIRS for renal stones 1–2 cm in an economically challenged setting: A prospective cohort study

Cited by 9 publications

References 24 publications

Evaluation of the safety and the reliability of day case mini-PCNL in treatment of renal stones 1 to 2 cm

Evaluation of the safety and the reliability of day case mini-PCNL in treatment of renal stones 1 to 2 cm

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy or flexible ureteral lithotripsy, which one is better for patients with upper ureteral calculi of 1.5-2.0cm in diameter

Flexible Ureteroscopy with a Tip-bendable Suction Ureteral Access Sheath Versus Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Treatment of 2–3-cm Renal Stones: Study Protocol for an International, Multicenter, Randomized, Parallel-group, Noninferiority Trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About