Comparison of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy with Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery Techniques in treatment of renal lower calyceal stones
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56056/amj.2022.157Keywords:
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy, Retrograde intrarenal surgery, Small renal calculiAbstract
Background and objectives: The aim of this study is a random prospective comparison in the outcomes of patients treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery in management of renal stones regarding stone free rate, quality of life, complications, fluoroscopy use, analgesic requirements and duration of hospital stay.
Methods: This study was conducted in Hawler / Paky hospital Urology department between January 2019 and June 2019 in a prospective study. A total of 50 patients ages between 18-65 years with renal lower calyceal stone; single or multiple and size between 1-2 cm were randomized into two groups of 25 patients; patients treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy (n; 25) and patients treated with retrograde intrarenal surgery techniques (n; 25).
Results: : There was no statistical significant difference between the 2 groups in regard to patients’ pre-operative stone size, stone skin distance, complete blood count, creatinine values, analgesia requirement and stone-free rates. There were significantly higher values in regard to hospital stay, amount of radiation, percentage of hematocrit decrease due to bleeding and complication status in percutaneous nephrolithotomy compared to retrograde intrarenal surgery. Preoperative stone sizes for patients with percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery was 15.7 ± 2.5 mm, 13.6 ± 2.2 mm, respectively, statistically there was no significant difference.
Conclusions: We deduced that both percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery minimal invasive surgical techniques can be applied to treat renal lower calyceal stones. Both techniques do not differ in stone-free rate, but in case of complications, fluoroscopy use, bleeding and hospital stay were higher in percutaneous nephrolithotomy.
Downloads
References
Alelign T. Petros B. Kidney Stone Disease: An Update on Current Concepts. Hindawi Adv Urol. 2018, Article ID 3068365. Available form: http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/au/2018/3068365.pdf
Türk C, Pet?ík A, Sarica K et al. EAU Guidelines on Diagnosis and Conservative Management of Urolithiasis. Eur Urol. 2016;69(3):468-74.
Fernström I, Johansson B. Percutaneous pyelolithotomy. A new extraction technique. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1976;10(3):257-9
Pearle M, Lotan Y. Urinary lithiasis: etiology, epidemiology, and pathogenesis. Campbell-walsh urology, 2015.
Grasso M1, Ficazzola M. Retrograde ureteropyeloscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi. J Urol. 1999;162(6):1904-8
Wewers ME, Lowe NK. A critical review of visual analogue scales in the measurement of clinical phenomena. Res Nurs Health. 1990;13(4):227-36
de la Rosette J, Assimos D, Desai M, et al. The Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy. Global Study: indications, complications, and outcomes in 5803 patients. J Endourol. 2011;25(1):11-7.
Albala D, Assimos D, Clayman R, et al. Lower pole I: a prospective randomized trial of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrostolithotomy for lower pole nephrolithiasis—initial results. J Urol. 2001;166(6): 2072-80.
Goldwasser B, Weinerth J, Carson C, Dunnick N. Factors affecting the success rate of percutaneous nephrolithotripsy and the incidence of retained fragments. J Urol. 1986;136(2):358-60.
Johnson G, Portela D, Grasso M. Advanced ureteroscopy: wireless and sheathless. J Endourol. 2006; 20(8): 552-5.
Papatsoris A, Sarica K. Flexible ureterorenoscopic management of upper tract pathologies. Arch Urol Res. 2012; 40(6): 639-46.
Binbay, M., Erbin A., Muslumanoglu A. The Role of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery in the Management of Kidney Lower Pole Stones. Turk Urol Sem. 2011; 2: 331-5
Lingeman, J., Siegel Y. and Steele B., Management of lower pole nephrolithiasis: a critical analysis. J Urol. 1994; 151(3): 663-7.
Resorlu, B., and Kara C. Effect of previous open renal surgery and failed extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy on the performance and outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourology, 2010; 24(1): 13-6.
Galvin DJ., Pearle MS., The contemporary management of renal and ureteric calculi. BJU int, 2006; 98(6):1283-8
Mariani, A.J., Combined electrohydraulic and holmium: YAG laser ureteroscopic nephrolithotripsy of large (greater than 4 cm) renal calculi. J Urol. 2007; 177(1): 168-73
Kourambas, J., Delvecchioa F, Munver R, Premingera P. Nitinol stone retrieval-assisted ureteroscopic management of lower pole renal calculi. Urology. 2000, 56(6): 935-9
Bozkurt O, Resorlu B, Yildiz Y, Can C, Unsal A. Retrograde intrarenal surgery versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the management of lower-pole renal stones with a diameter of 15 to 20 mm. J Endourology. 2011, 25(7): 1131-5
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Muhammed Suhaib Subhi Fakhri Almufti
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The copyright on any article published in AMJ (The Scientific Journal of Kurdistan Higher Council of Medical Specialties )is retained by the author(s) in agreement with the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial ShareAlike License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
