» Articles » PMID: 25170589

Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery Versus Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Treatment of Renal Stones >2 Cm: a Meta-analysis

Overview
Journal Urol Int
Publisher Karger
Specialty Urology
Date 2014 Aug 30
PMID 25170589
Citations 20
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To systematically review the efficacy and safety of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for the treatment of renal calculi >2 cm.

Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database about RIRS and PCNL for the treatment of renal stones. The retrieval time ended in December 2013. All clinical trials were retrieved and their included references investigated. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of all included studies, and the eligible studies were included and analyzed using the RevMan 5.2 software.

Results: Two randomized controlled trials and six clinical controlled trials were included, involving a total of 590 patients. Our meta-analysis showed that there were not significant differences in stone-free rate (relative risk [RR] = 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88-1.02, p = 0.11) and fever (RR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.54-1.67, p = 0.85) between RIRS and PCNL. We found that hospital stay (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -2.10, 95% CI -3.08 to -1.11, p < 0.10) and bleeding (RR = 0.20, 95% CI 0.06-0.68, p = 0.01) were lower and operation time was longer (WMD = 19.11, 95% CI 7.83-30.39, p < 0.10) for RIRS.

Conclusion: RIRS is a safe and effective procedure. It can successfully treat patients with stones >2 cm with a high stone-free rate and significantly reduce hospital stay without increasing complications. RIRS can be used as an alternative treatment to PCNL in selected cases with larger renal stones. However, further randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Citing Articles

Flexible Ureteroscopy with a Tip-bendable Suction Ureteral Access Sheath Versus Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Treatment of 2-3-cm Renal Stones: Study Protocol for an International, Multicenter, Randomized, Parallel-group, Noninferiority Trial.

Zhu W, Chai C, Ma J, Gokce M, Gadzhiev N, Kalathia J Eur Urol Open Sci. 2024; 70:167-173.

PMID: 39559532 PMC: 11570736. DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2024.10.014.


Heavy as a rock or light as dust: a comparison between the perceived workload for extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, ureterorenoscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Henderickx M, Hendriks N, Bouma-Houwert A, Baard J, Kamphuis G, Schuil H Cent European J Urol. 2024; 77(1):129-135.

PMID: 38645810 PMC: 11032039. DOI: 10.5173/ceju.2023.214.


The effect of standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy, miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery on biomarkers of renal injury: a randomized clinical trial.

Memmos D, Sarafidis P, Alexandrou M, Theodorakopoulou M, Anastasiadis A, Mykoniatis I Clin Kidney J. 2023; 16(11):2216-2225.

PMID: 37915926 PMC: 10616431. DOI: 10.1093/ckj/sfad120.


Comparative Analysis of Surgical Outcomes of Flexible Ureteroscopy and Da Vinci Robotic Surgery in Community Patients with Renal Pelvic Stones Larger than 2 cm.

Yeh Y, Weng S, Lin Y, Chen C, Tsao S, Tsai H Medicina (Kaunas). 2023; 59(8).

PMID: 37629685 PMC: 10456386. DOI: 10.3390/medicina59081395.


A Newly Developed Hematuria Grading System May Predict the Status of Stone-Free and Acute Pyelonephritis of Minimally Invasive Renal Stone Surgery.

Kim G, Jung G, Suh J, Park J, Cho S J Clin Med. 2023; 12(8).

PMID: 37109157 PMC: 10142515. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12082820.