Flexible mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intra-renal surgery in the management of renal stones: a randomized controlled trial.

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Ahmed Higazy, M Kandil, Ahmed Elshafei, M Esmat, A M Tawfeek
{"title":"Flexible mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intra-renal surgery in the management of renal stones: a randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Ahmed Higazy, M Kandil, Ahmed Elshafei, M Esmat, A M Tawfeek","doi":"10.1007/s00345-025-05689-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of flexible mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (F-mPCNL) in managing nephrolithiasis compared to retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>130 adult patients with renal stones (1.5-3 cm) were randomized to F-mPCNL or RIRS. The stone-free rate (SFR) was our primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were the operative time, fluoroscopy time, DJ stent insertion rate, auxiliary procedure needed, hospital stay, complications rate, total cost, and quality of life for both procedures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>out of 130 patients in our study, 125 were evaluated and completed the follow-up period. Preoperative data was similar in both groups including stone characteristics. F-mPCNL showed a better SFR of 95.1% compared to 77.8% in the RIRS group (p-value˂0.001), this was associated with less need for additional procedures. F-mPCNL was associated with a shorter operation time of 47.60 ± 14.54 min compared to 59.30 ± 20.10 min in the RIRS group (p-value˂0.001). F-mPCNL showed less radiational exposure and less need for DJ stent insertion than RIRS. The overall complication rate was comparable in both groups, postoperative pain, need for extra doses of analgesics, and hospital stay were higher in the F-mPCNL group. In our study, F-mPCNL was shown to be more cost-effective than RIRS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>F-mPCNL showed a superior SFR in treating renal stones compared to RIRS in a single session, with less need for auxiliary procedures, shorter operative time, less radiational exposure, and better quality of life. However, it was associated with slightly more hospital stay and postoperative pain compared to RIRS.</p>","PeriodicalId":23954,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Urology","volume":"43 1","pages":"328"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12106488/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-025-05689-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of flexible mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (F-mPCNL) in managing nephrolithiasis compared to retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS).

Methods: 130 adult patients with renal stones (1.5-3 cm) were randomized to F-mPCNL or RIRS. The stone-free rate (SFR) was our primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were the operative time, fluoroscopy time, DJ stent insertion rate, auxiliary procedure needed, hospital stay, complications rate, total cost, and quality of life for both procedures.

Results: out of 130 patients in our study, 125 were evaluated and completed the follow-up period. Preoperative data was similar in both groups including stone characteristics. F-mPCNL showed a better SFR of 95.1% compared to 77.8% in the RIRS group (p-value˂0.001), this was associated with less need for additional procedures. F-mPCNL was associated with a shorter operation time of 47.60 ± 14.54 min compared to 59.30 ± 20.10 min in the RIRS group (p-value˂0.001). F-mPCNL showed less radiational exposure and less need for DJ stent insertion than RIRS. The overall complication rate was comparable in both groups, postoperative pain, need for extra doses of analgesics, and hospital stay were higher in the F-mPCNL group. In our study, F-mPCNL was shown to be more cost-effective than RIRS.

Conclusion: F-mPCNL showed a superior SFR in treating renal stones compared to RIRS in a single session, with less need for auxiliary procedures, shorter operative time, less radiational exposure, and better quality of life. However, it was associated with slightly more hospital stay and postoperative pain compared to RIRS.

柔性微型经皮肾镜取石术与逆行肾内手术治疗肾结石:一项随机对照试验。
目的:与逆行肾内手术(RIRS)相比,评估柔性微型经皮肾镜取石术(F-mPCNL)治疗肾结石的安全性、有效性和成本效益。方法:130例成年肾结石(1.5- 3cm)患者随机分为F-mPCNL组和RIRS组。无结石率(SFR)是我们的主要观察指标。次要结果为手术时间、透视时间、DJ支架置入率、所需辅助手术、住院时间、并发症发生率、总费用和两种手术的生活质量。结果:在我们的研究中,130例患者中有125例进行了评估并完成了随访期。两组术前资料相似,包括结石特征。与RIRS组的77.8%相比,F-mPCNL组的SFR为95.1% (p值小于0.001),这与较少的额外手术需求相关。F-mPCNL组的手术时间为47.60±14.54 min,而RIRS组的手术时间为59.30±20.10 min (p值小于0.001)。与RIRS相比,F-mPCNL显示较少的辐射暴露和较少的DJ支架置入需求。两组的总并发症发生率相当,术后疼痛、需要额外剂量的镇痛药和住院时间F-mPCNL组较高。在我们的研究中,F-mPCNL被证明比RIRS更具成本效益。结论:与RIRS相比,F-mPCNL治疗肾结石的SFR优于RIRS,无需辅助手术,手术时间更短,辐射暴露更少,生活质量更好。然而,与RIRS相比,它与更多的住院时间和术后疼痛相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
World Journal of Urology
World Journal of Urology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
8.80%
发文量
317
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY conveys regularly the essential results of urological research and their practical and clinical relevance to a broad audience of urologists in research and clinical practice. In order to guarantee a balanced program, articles are published to reflect the developments in all fields of urology on an internationally advanced level. Each issue treats a main topic in review articles of invited international experts. Free papers are unrelated articles to the main topic.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信