Retrograde Intrarenal Renal Surgery versus Supine Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotripsy in Treatment of Renal Pelvic Stones Less than 2 cm, Randomized Clinical Study.
Ahmed Hakim Abdelgawad, Mamdouh Abdelhamid Elhawy, Al Ayman Hussein Fathy Hussein, Tarek Kh Fathelbab, Amr Kamal Rabea Tolba, Ahmed Mohamed Fawzy
{"title":"Retrograde Intrarenal Renal Surgery versus Supine Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotripsy in Treatment of Renal Pelvic Stones Less than 2 cm, Randomized Clinical Study.","authors":"Ahmed Hakim Abdelgawad, Mamdouh Abdelhamid Elhawy, Al Ayman Hussein Fathy Hussein, Tarek Kh Fathelbab, Amr Kamal Rabea Tolba, Ahmed Mohamed Fawzy","doi":"10.5152/tud.2026.25121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) is the first-line treatment for kidney stones between 1 and 2 cm and can serve as an alternative to percutaneous nephrolithotomy for larger stones in high-risk patients, including those with bleeding disorders, obesity, renal congenital abnormalities, or solitary kidneys. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of supine mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) versus RIRS for the treatment of renal pelvic stones less than 2 cm.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective, randomized, double-blinded study included 50 patients aged >18 years, of both sexes, with renal stones <2 cm. Patients were randomized into 2 equal groups: Group A underwent supine mini-PCNL, while Group B underwent RIRS. Stone and patient characteristics, SFR, and perioperative events were compared between groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 50 patients equally distributed into the 2 groups. Operative time was significantly lower in Group A than in Group B (P < .05), while fluoroscopic time was significantly higher in Group A than in Group B (P < .05). Also, hospital stay was significantly longer in Group A compared to Group B (P < .001). SFR and retreatments were comparable between both groups. Complications were also similar, with no significant differences observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Supine mini-PCNL remains an effective option for achieving high stone clearance with a shorter operative time while avoiding ureteral access manipulation, while RIRS provides advantages such as reduced radiation exposure, shorter hospitalization but with a higher need for stenting and secondary procedures. Supine mini- PCNL is not inferior to RIRS in the treatment of less than 2 cm renal stones. Cite this article as: Abdelgawad AH, Elhawy MA, Hussein AAHF, Fathelbab TK, Tolba AKR, Fawzy AM. Retrograde intrarenal renal surgery versus supine mini percutaneous nephrolithotripsy in treatment of renal pelvic stones less than 2 cm, randomized clinical study. Urol Res Pract. 2025;51(6): 230-236.</p>","PeriodicalId":101337,"journal":{"name":"Urology research & practice","volume":"51 6","pages":"230-236"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13034001/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urology research & practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2026.25121","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) is the first-line treatment for kidney stones between 1 and 2 cm and can serve as an alternative to percutaneous nephrolithotomy for larger stones in high-risk patients, including those with bleeding disorders, obesity, renal congenital abnormalities, or solitary kidneys. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of supine mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) versus RIRS for the treatment of renal pelvic stones less than 2 cm.
Methods: This prospective, randomized, double-blinded study included 50 patients aged >18 years, of both sexes, with renal stones <2 cm. Patients were randomized into 2 equal groups: Group A underwent supine mini-PCNL, while Group B underwent RIRS. Stone and patient characteristics, SFR, and perioperative events were compared between groups.
Results: A total of 50 patients equally distributed into the 2 groups. Operative time was significantly lower in Group A than in Group B (P < .05), while fluoroscopic time was significantly higher in Group A than in Group B (P < .05). Also, hospital stay was significantly longer in Group A compared to Group B (P < .001). SFR and retreatments were comparable between both groups. Complications were also similar, with no significant differences observed.
Conclusions: Supine mini-PCNL remains an effective option for achieving high stone clearance with a shorter operative time while avoiding ureteral access manipulation, while RIRS provides advantages such as reduced radiation exposure, shorter hospitalization but with a higher need for stenting and secondary procedures. Supine mini- PCNL is not inferior to RIRS in the treatment of less than 2 cm renal stones. Cite this article as: Abdelgawad AH, Elhawy MA, Hussein AAHF, Fathelbab TK, Tolba AKR, Fawzy AM. Retrograde intrarenal renal surgery versus supine mini percutaneous nephrolithotripsy in treatment of renal pelvic stones less than 2 cm, randomized clinical study. Urol Res Pract. 2025;51(6): 230-236.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
