Retrospective study of single-use digital flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy versus miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy for 1.5-2.5cm lower pole renal stones

被引:2
作者
Meng, Wei [1 ]
Zhang, Huajun [3 ]
Wang, Jiahao [2 ]
Chen, Bo [1 ]
Jiang, Zhaosheng [1 ]
Ma, Limin [1 ]
Guan, Yangbo [1 ]
机构
[1] Nantong Univ, Affiliated Hosp, Med Sch, Dept Urol, Nantong 226001, Peoples R China
[2] Nanjing Med Univ, Affiliated Wuxi Peoples Hosp, Dept Urol, Wuxi 214023, Peoples R China
[3] Dalian Med Univ, Dalian 116000, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Single-use digital flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy; Miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy; Lower pole renal stones; Safety; Efficacy; RETROGRADE INTRARENAL SURGERY; SHOCK-WAVE LITHOTRIPSY; KIDNEY-STONES; METAANALYSIS; CM; PREVALENCE; MANAGEMENT;
D O I
10.1007/s11255-023-03771-2
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Purpose Retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical information of patients with 1.5-2.5 cm lower pole renal stones treated by single-use digital flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (fURS) and miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) in affiliated hospital of the Nantong University from January 2020 to December 2022. To compare the safety and efficacy of single-use fURS and MPCNL in the treatment from 1.5cm to 2.5cm lower pole renal stones.Methods Clinical information of 141 patients were collected and divided into single-use fURS group and MPCNL group according to their treatment methods, including 83 patients in the single-use fURS group and 58 patients in the MPCNL group. Baseline data, data on the clinical characteristics of stones, laboratory examination data, operation time, and postoperative data of the two groups were collected. Statistical analysis was made on the collected data to analyze the differences and causes between the two groups of patients.Results There was no significant difference in the baseline data and preoperative clinical features of 141 patients between the two groups (P > 0.05). In comparison of postoperative serum indexes, the drop values of hemoglobin and creatinine in single-use fURS group were lower than those in MPCNL group, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The stone free rate was higher in the MPCNL group than in the single-use fURS group on the first day after surgery. At the 1st month after surgery, the two groups were similar. At 3rd month after surgery, the single-use fURS group was slightly higher than the MPCNL group, with no statistical significance (P > 0.05). The total complication rate in single-use fURS group was slightly lower than that in MPCNL group, but there was no statistical significance (P > 0.05).Conclusions Single-use fURS has similar safety and efficacy to MPCNL in the treatment of 1.5-2.5cm lower pole renal stones. Single-use fURS may be a new option for the treatment of these stones.
引用
收藏
页码:55 / 62
页数:8
相关论文
共 23 条
  • [21] Yuri P, 2018, ACTA MED INDONES, V50, P18
  • [22] The treatment option for calyceal diverticulum stones: flexible ureteroscopy lithotripsy (FURL) or all-seeing needle-assisted percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL)?
    Zeng, Jin
    Zhang, Lu
    Chen, Xingfa
    He, Hui
    Li, Xiang
    [J]. UROLITHIASIS, 2022, 50 (06) : 743 - 749
  • [23] Comparison of the Efficacy of Ultra-Mini PCNL, Flexible Ureteroscopy, and Shock Wave Lithotripsy on the Treatment of 1-2 cm Lower Pole Renal Calculi
    Zhang, He
    Hong, Tian Yu
    Li, Gang
    Jiang, Ning
    Hu, Chuanyi
    Cui, Xingang
    Chu, Chuanmin
    Zhao, Jun Long
    [J]. UROLOGIA INTERNATIONALIS, 2019, 102 (02) : 153 - 159