Management of Anteriorly Located Renal Caliceal Stones with Two Different Techniques (Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy vs Flexible Ureteroscopic Laser Lithotripsy): A Critical Comparative Evaluation of the Outcomes.

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Ferhat Yakup Suçeken, Murat Akgül, Elif Ertaş, Ali Selim Durmaz, Emre Burak Şahinler, Alper Aşık, Hikmet Yaşar, Eyüp Veli Küçük, Kemal Sarıca
{"title":"Management of Anteriorly Located Renal Caliceal Stones with Two Different Techniques (Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy <i>vs</i> Flexible Ureteroscopic Laser Lithotripsy): A Critical Comparative Evaluation of the Outcomes.","authors":"Ferhat Yakup Suçeken, Murat Akgül, Elif Ertaş, Ali Selim Durmaz, Emre Burak Şahinler, Alper Aşık, Hikmet Yaşar, Eyüp Veli Küçük, Kemal Sarıca","doi":"10.1089/end.2024.0888","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Purpose:</i></b> To evaluate the efficacy and safety of two different approaches, flexible ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy (fURS) and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL), for the minimally invasive management of anteriorly located caliceal stones in a location-based manner. <b><i>Materials and Methods:</i></b> A total of 93 patients with anterior caliceal stones (<15 mm) were treated with following two different modalities: fURS (<i>n</i> = 52, 55.9%) (Group 1) and mini-PCNL (<i>n</i> = 41, 44.1%) (Group 2). Demographic, per-operative, and postoperative parameters were comparatively evaluated in both groups. <b><i>Results:</i></b> The groups were similar in terms of their demographic data and stone characteristics (<i>p</i> > 0.05). Operation, fluoroscopy time, and hospital stay were significantly longer in Group 2 (<i>p</i> < 0.001). The perioperative complication and overall stone-free rates were similar between the groups (<i>p</i> = 0.44 and <i>p</i> = 0.53, respectively). However, when the stone-free rates were examined according to the calix groups, Group 2 was significantly more effective in terms of stone-free rates in the lower calix (52% <i>vs</i> 84%, <i>p</i> = 0.03). Although not statistically significant, more postoperative complications were observed in Group 2 (<i>p</i> = 0.09). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Our findings demonstrate that although mini-PCNL may be performed well through a caliceal puncture to remove lower caliceal stones with a high stone clearance rate, the fURS approach may be safer and more rational for the removal of stones located in the middle and upper anterior calices.</p>","PeriodicalId":15723,"journal":{"name":"Journal of endourology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of endourology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2024.0888","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of two different approaches, flexible ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy (fURS) and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL), for the minimally invasive management of anteriorly located caliceal stones in a location-based manner. Materials and Methods: A total of 93 patients with anterior caliceal stones (<15 mm) were treated with following two different modalities: fURS (n = 52, 55.9%) (Group 1) and mini-PCNL (n = 41, 44.1%) (Group 2). Demographic, per-operative, and postoperative parameters were comparatively evaluated in both groups. Results: The groups were similar in terms of their demographic data and stone characteristics (p > 0.05). Operation, fluoroscopy time, and hospital stay were significantly longer in Group 2 (p < 0.001). The perioperative complication and overall stone-free rates were similar between the groups (p = 0.44 and p = 0.53, respectively). However, when the stone-free rates were examined according to the calix groups, Group 2 was significantly more effective in terms of stone-free rates in the lower calix (52% vs 84%, p = 0.03). Although not statistically significant, more postoperative complications were observed in Group 2 (p = 0.09). Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate that although mini-PCNL may be performed well through a caliceal puncture to remove lower caliceal stones with a high stone clearance rate, the fURS approach may be safer and more rational for the removal of stones located in the middle and upper anterior calices.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of endourology
Journal of endourology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
14.80%
发文量
254
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Endourology, JE Case Reports, and Videourology are the leading peer-reviewed journal, case reports publication, and innovative videojournal companion covering all aspects of minimally invasive urology research, applications, and clinical outcomes. The leading journal of minimally invasive urology for over 30 years, Journal of Endourology is the essential publication for practicing surgeons who want to keep up with the latest surgical technologies in endoscopic, laparoscopic, robotic, and image-guided procedures as they apply to benign and malignant diseases of the genitourinary tract. This flagship journal includes the companion videojournal Videourology™ with every subscription. While Journal of Endourology remains focused on publishing rigorously peer reviewed articles, Videourology accepts original videos containing material that has not been reported elsewhere, except in the form of an abstract or a conference presentation. Journal of Endourology coverage includes: The latest laparoscopic, robotic, endoscopic, and image-guided techniques for treating both benign and malignant conditions Pioneering research articles Controversial cases in endourology Techniques in endourology with accompanying videos Reviews and epochs in endourology Endourology survey section of endourology relevant manuscripts published in other journals.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信