» Articles » PMID: 28116738

A Comparison of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery and Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Management of Renal Stones ?2 CM

Overview
Journal Urol J
Specialty Urology
Date 2017 Jan 25
PMID 28116738
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: In this retrospective study, we aimed to compare the outcomes in patients who have been treated withpercutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) on renal stones ≥ 2 cm size.

Materials And Methods: We evaluated patients who underwent PNL or RIRS for renal stones ≥ 2 cm size betweenNovember 2011 and November 2014. Stone size, operation, fluoroscopy and hospitalization time, success rates,stone-free rates and complication rates were compared in both groups. Patients were followed for three months.

Results: 254 patients were in the PNL Group. 185 patients were in the RIRS Group. The mean age was 46.88 and48.04 years in PNL and RIRS groups, respectively.The patient and stone characteristics (age, gender, Body Mass Index, kidney anomaly, SWL history and stoneradioopacity) were similar between two groups.The mean stone size preoperatively was significantly larger in patients who were treated with PNL (26.33mm.vs24.04mm.; P = .006). In the RIRS group, the mean stone number was significantly higher than PNL group (P <.001).The mean operative, fluoroscopy and hospitalization time were significantly higher in PNL group (P < .001). Thestone-free rate was 93.3% for the PNL group and 73.5% for the RIRS group after first procedure (P < .001). Nomajor complication (Clavien III-V) occurred in the RIRS group.

Conclusion: Although the primary treatment method for renal stones ≥ 2cm size is PNL, serious complicationscan be seen. Therefore, RIRS can be an alternative treatment option in the management of renal stones ≥2 cm size.

Citing Articles

Comparison of the Efficacy and Complications of Soft Ureteroscopy Lithotripsy and Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in the Treatment of Urinary Calculi: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Han W, Ge J, Xu X Comput Math Methods Med. 2022; 2022:5829205.

PMID: 35813431 PMC: 9270128. DOI: 10.1155/2022/5829205.


Comparison stone-free rate and effects on quality of life of percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal pelvis stone (2-4 cm): A prospective controlled study.

Ucer O, Erbatu O, Albaz A, Temeltas G, Gumus B, Muezzinoglu T Curr Urol. 2022; 16(1):5-8.

PMID: 35633857 PMC: 9132185. DOI: 10.1097/CU9.0000000000000071.


Effectiveness of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy, Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery, and Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Treatment of Renal Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Kim C, Chung D, Rha K, Lee J, Lee S Medicina (Kaunas). 2021; 57(1).

PMID: 33396839 PMC: 7823824. DOI: 10.3390/medicina57010026.


Evaluation of flexible ureteroscope with an omni-directional bending tip, using a JOYSTICK unit (URF-Y0016): an ex-vivo study.

Inoue T, Okada S, Hamamoto S, Miura H, Matsuzaki J, Tambo M World J Urol. 2020; 39(1):209-215.

PMID: 32172330 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-020-03151-w.


An easy risk stratification to recommend the optimal patients with 2-3 cm kidney stones to receive retrograde intrarenal surgery or mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Zhao Z, Sun H, Zeng T, Deng T, Liu Y, Zeng G Urolithiasis. 2019; 48(2):167-173.

PMID: 31101948 DOI: 10.1007/s00240-019-01134-0.