Comparative study between ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus stented extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of renal stones in Egypt

被引:0
|
作者
Radwan, Ahmed Ibrahim [1 ]
Saif, Ahmed Mohsen Ibrahim [1 ]
Samir, Younan Ramsis [1 ]
Maged, Wael Ali [1 ]
Gamal, Mohamed A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Ain Shams Univ, Fac Med, Cairo, Egypt
关键词
Nephrolithiasis; shock wave lithotripsy (SWL); ultra-mini-PCNL; PCNL;
D O I
10.1080/2090598X.2023.2211897
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
ObjectivesThe purpose of this study is to compare results, safety and outcome of ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) versus stented shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) for the management of renal calculi sized 10-20 mm.MethodsThis study was conducted at Urology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University. After meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria, 90 patients were randomized to either ultra-mini-PCNL group or stented SWL group through the closed-envelope technique, with 45 patients in each group. Patient data were collected preoperatively, immediately postoperatively and 2 and 4 weeks postoperatively assessing operative time, hospital stay, complications including haematuria, fever, the need for blood transfusion, residual stones and the need for retreatment.ResultsStone-free rate (SFR) was higher in the ultra-mini-PCNL group compared to the stented SWL group, with no statistically significant difference with P-value = 0.316. As for the need for retreatment, it was slightly higher in the stented SWL group compared to the ultra-mini-PCNL group, yet this difference was statistically insignificant with P-value = 0.681.We found no statistically significant difference between both groups regarding post-operative complications including fever, haematuria and need for blood transfusion, respectively.Operative time and hospital stay were significantly higher in the ultra-mini-PCNL group compared to the stented SWL group with P-value < 0.001 for both.ConclusionBoth stented SWL and ultra-mini-PCNL are good treatment choices for renal stones sized less than 2 cm with low complication rates. Stone size indices were significant predictor for the need for retreatment. Further studies to compare SFR based on stone size in both interventions are needed.
引用
收藏
页码:273 / 279
页数:7
相关论文
共 17 条
  • [1] Flexible ureteroscopy, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy for management of lower pole renal hard stones ≤ 2 cm: a prospective randomized study
    Zeinelabden, Khaled Magdy
    Abdelhalim, Elsayed
    Galal, Mohamed
    Abdelbaky, Tarek
    Nabeeh, Hossam
    BMC UROLOGY, 2024, 24 (01):
  • [2] Comparison between standard, mini and ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy for single renal stones: a prospective study
    Adamou, Constantinos
    Goulimi, Evangelia
    Pagonis, Konstantinos
    Peteinaris, Angelis
    Tsaturyan, Arman
    Vagionis, Athanasios
    Lattarulo, Marco
    Giannitsas, Konstantinos
    Liatsikos, Evangelos
    Kallidonis, Panagiotis
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2022, 40 (10) : 2543 - 2548
  • [3] Management of lower pole renal calculi: shock wave lithotripsy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus flexible ureteroscopy
    Glenn M. Preminger
    Urological Research, 2006, 34 : 108 - 111
  • [4] Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in new versus those patients with previous history of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy on ipsilateral side
    Iqbal, Nadeem
    Iqbal, Sajid
    Zareen, Nasir
    Blair, Keron Akintola Ayodele
    PAKISTAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2022, 38 (04) : 833 - 837
  • [5] Management of lower pole renal calculi: shock wave lithotripsy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus flexible ureteroscopy
    Preminger, GM
    UROLOGICAL RESEARCH, 2006, 34 (02): : 108 - 111
  • [6] Cost-effectiveness of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery, Standard and Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy, and Shock Wave Lithotripsy for the Management of 1-2cm Renal Stones
    Wymer, Kevin M.
    Sharma, Vidit
    Juvet, Tristan
    Klett, Dane E.
    Borah, Bijan J.
    Koo, Kevin
    Rivera, Marcelino
    Agarwal, Deepak
    Humphreys, Mitchell R.
    Potretzke, Aaron M.
    UROLOGY, 2021, 156 : 71 - 77
  • [7] Ultra-Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for the Treatment of Upper Urinary Tract Stones Sized between 10-20 mm in Children Younger Than 8 Years Old
    Sofimajidpour, Heshmatollah
    Zareiez, Bushra
    Rasouli, Mohammad Aziz
    Hoseine, Masoumeh
    UROLOGY JOURNAL, 2020, 17 (02) : 139 - 142
  • [8] Management of large renal stones with super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy: an international multicentre comparative study
    Liu, Yang
    Cai, Chao
    Aquino, Albert
    Al-Mousawi, Shabir
    Zhang, Xuepei
    Choong, Simon K. S.
    He, Xiang
    Fan, Xianming
    Chen, Bin
    Feng, Jianhua
    Zhu, Xuhui
    Al-Naimi, Abdulla
    Mao, Houping
    Tang, Huilong
    Jin, Dayong
    Li, Xiancheng
    Cao, Fenghong
    Jiang, Hua
    Long, Yongfu
    Zhang, Wei
    Wang, Gang
    Xu, Zihao
    Zhang, Xin
    Yin, Shanfeng
    Zeng, Guohua
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2020, 126 (01) : 168 - 176
  • [9] Between a Rock and an Airspace Pneumothorax After Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Renal Stones in a Patient With Cystic Fibrosis
    Frost, Freddy
    Griffiths, Paul
    Brockelsby, Chris
    Lynch, Ciaran
    Walshaw, Martin J.
    Nazareth, Dilip
    CHEST, 2018, 154 (03) : E61 - E63
  • [10] Dissolution Therapy versus Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Radiolucent Renal Stones in Children: A Prospective Study
    Elderwy, Ahmad A.
    Kurkar, Adel
    Hussein, AlMontaser
    Abozeid, Hazem
    Hammodda, Hisham M.
    Ibraheim, Abdel-Fatah
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2014, 191 (05) : 1491 - 1495