Ferhat Yakup Suçeken, Murat Akgül, Elif Ertaş, Ali Selim Durmaz, Emre Burak Şahinler, Alper Aşık, Hikmet Yaşar, Eyüp Veli Küçük, Kemal Sarıca
{"title":"两种不同技术(微型经皮肾镜取石术与柔性输尿管镜激光碎石术)治疗肾盏前结石的疗效比较","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":"451-456"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"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\":\"451-456\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"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\":\"2025/2/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","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":"2025/2/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:评价柔性输尿管镜激光碎石术(fURS)和微型经皮肾镜取石术(mini-PCNL)两种不同入路定位微创治疗前肾盏结石的疗效和安全性。材料与方法:共93例前盏结石患者(n = 52, 55.9%)(第一组)和mini-PCNL患者(n = 41, 44.1%)(第二组)。比较两组患者的人口学、术前和术后参数。结果:两组患者人口学资料及结石特征相似(p < 0.05)。2组手术时间、透视时间、住院时间均明显延长(p < 0.001)。两组围手术期并发症及总结石清除率相似(p = 0.44, p = 0.53)。然而,当根据杯形组检查无结石率时,组2在较低杯形的无结石率方面明显更有效(52% vs 84%, p = 0.03)。虽然无统计学意义,但2组术后并发症发生率较高(p = 0.09)。结论:我们的研究结果表明,尽管通过肾盏穿刺可以很好地进行mini-PCNL,以去除下部肾盏结石,结石清除率高,但对于去除位于中上前盏的结石,fURS入路可能更安全,更合理。
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.
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.
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.