The Role of Super-mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (SMP) in the Treatment of Symptomatic Lower Pole Renal Stones (LPSs) After the Failure of Shockwave Lithotripsy (SWL) or Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery (RIRS)

Overview

Journal Urolithiasis

Publisher Springer

Specialty Urology

Date 2018 Jun 28

PMID 29947994

Citations 5

Authors

Junhong Fan

Tao Zhang

Wei Zhu

Alberto Gurioli

Irene Raphael Ketegwe

Guohua Zeng

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

To assess the safety and efficacy of super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SMP) in the treatment of symptomatic lower pole renal stones (LPSs) after the failure of shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), we retrospectively evaluated 44 patients with symptomatic LPSs with previously failed SWL or RIRS and consequently underwent SMP from October 2014 to March 2016. The percutaneous renal access was performed 12-14F with C-arm fluoroscopy or ultrasonographic guidance. Stone disintegration was performed using either Holmium laser or pneumatic lithotripter. Perioperative parameters along with operations were assessed in detail. A total of 44 patients (mean age 49.1 ± 13.7 years) were included in the study. Stone size was 18.4 ± 6.0 mm (range 9-29), operative time was 63.9 ± 32.7 min (range 14-145) and hospital stay was 2.8 ± 1.2 days (range 1-5). The hemoglobin drop was 12.4 ± 8.8 g/L (range 0-31), and no patients required blood transfusion. Complete stone-free status was achieved in 40 (90.9%) patients. Clinically insignificant residual fragments were observed in three (6.8%) patients and only one (2.3%) patient had a 6 mm residual calculus. A total of three minor complications (urinary tract infection, hemorrhage resolved by hemostatics and renal colic requiring analgesics) were observed postoperatively. For symptomatic LPSs after the failure of SWL or RIRS, SMP is a safe and efficient auxiliary option and even might be an alternative to SWL or RIRS, while further considering the stone-free rates and stone-related events.

Citing Articles

Relocation of lower pole renal stones helps improve the stone-free rate during flexible ureteroscopy with a low complication rate.

Huang R, Chen J, Zhou Y, Wang J, Hui C, Jiang M World J Urol. 2024; 42(1):30.

PMID: 38217719 PMC: 10787685. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-023-04703-6.

Renal stone density on native CT-scan as a predictor of treatment outcomes in shock wave lithotripsy.

Muter S, Abd Z, Saeed R J Med Life. 2023; 15(12):1579-1584.

PMID: 36762325 PMC: 9884350. DOI: 10.25122/jml-2022-0153.

Super-Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Nephrolithiasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Zeid M, Sayedin H, Sridharan N, Narayanaswamy A, Abul F, Jacob P Cureus. 2023; 14(12):e32253.

PMID: 36620813 PMC: 9815048. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.32253.

Neurogenic Bladder-Induced Stone in a Pelvic Kidney of a Caudal Regression Syndrome Patient: Management of a Complex Case.

Alomar M, Alghafees M, Aljurayyad A, Alsuhaibani H, Almaiman S, Alotaibi T Cureus. 2022; 14(5):e25479.

PMID: 35783872 PMC: 9241482. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.25479.

Comparative analysis of retrograde intrarenal surgery and modified ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of lower pole renal stones (1.5-3.5 cm).

Li Z, Lai C, Shah A, Xie W, Liu C, Huang L BMC Urol. 2020; 20(1):27.

PMID: 32178654 PMC: 7074985. DOI: 10.1186/s12894-020-00586-6.

References

Grasso M . Ureteropyeloscopic treatment of ureteral and intrarenal calculi. Urol Clin North Am. 2000; 27(4):623-31. DOI: 10.1016/s0094-0143(05)70112-9. View

Albala D, Assimos D, Clayman R, Denstedt J, Grasso M, Kahn R . Lower pole I: a prospective randomized trial of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrostolithotomy for lower pole nephrolithiasis-initial results. J Urol. 2001; 166(6):2072-80. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(05)65508-5. View

Schuster T, Hollenbeck B, Faerber G, Wolf Jr J . Ureteroscopic treatment of lower pole calculi: comparison of lithotripsy in situ and after displacement. J Urol. 2002; 168(1):43-5. View

Fong Y, Peh S, Ho S, Ng F, Quek P, Ng K . Lower pole ratio: a new and accurate predictor of lower pole stone clearance after shockwave lithotripsy?. Int J Urol. 2004; 11(9):700-3. DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2004.00877.x. View

Pearle M, Lingeman J, Leveillee R, Kuo R, Preminger G, Nadler R . Prospective, randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi 1 cm or less. J Urol. 2005; 173(6):2005-9. DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000158458.51706.56. View

Chiong E, Hwee S, Kay L, Liang S, Kamaraj R, Esuvaranathan K . Randomized controlled study of mechanical percussion, diuresis, and inversion therapy to assist passage of lower pole renal calculi after shock wave lithotripsy. Urology. 2005; 65(6):1070-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2004.12.045. View

Preminger G . Management of lower pole renal calculi: shock wave lithotripsy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus flexible ureteroscopy. Urol Res. 2006; 34(2):108-11. DOI: 10.1007/s00240-005-0020-6. View

Al-Ansari A, As-Sadiq K, Al-Said S, Younis N, Jaleel O, Shokeir A . Prognostic factors of success of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in the treatment of renal stones. Int Urol Nephrol. 2006; 38(1):63-7. DOI: 10.1007/s11255-005-3155-z. View

Bilen C, Kocak B, Kitirci G, Ozkaya O, Sarikaya S . Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children: lessons learned in 5 years at a single institution. J Urol. 2007; 177(5):1867-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.01.052. View

10.

Talas H, Kilic O, Tangal S, Safak M . Does lower-pole caliceal anatomy predict stone clearance after shock wave lithotripsy for primary lower-pole nephrolithiasis?. Urol Int. 2007; 79(2):129-32. DOI: 10.1159/000106325. View

11.

Raman J, Pearle M . Management options for lower pole renal calculi. Curr Opin Urol. 2008; 18(2):214-9. DOI: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e3282f517ea. View

12.

Bozkurt O, Resorlu B, Yildiz Y, Can C, Unsal A . Retrograde intrarenal surgery versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the management of lower-pole renal stones with a diameter of 15 to 20 mm. J Endourol. 2011; 25(7):1131-5. DOI: 10.1089/end.2010.0737. View

13.

de la Rosette J, Opondo D, Daels F, Giusti G, Serrano A, Kandasami S . Categorisation of complications and validation of the Clavien score for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol. 2012; 62(2):246-55. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.03.055. View

14.

Zeng G, Wan S, Zhao Z, Zhu J, Tuerxun A, Song C . Super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SMP): a new concept in technique and instrumentation. BJU Int. 2015; 117(4):655-61. DOI: 10.1111/bju.13242. View

15.

Turk C, Petrik A, Sarica K, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, Straub M . EAU Guidelines on Interventional Treatment for Urolithiasis. Eur Urol. 2015; 69(3):475-82. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.041. View

16.

Kang M, Son H, Jeong H, Cho M, Cho S . Clearance rates of residual stone fragments and dusts after endoscopic lithotripsy procedures using a holmium laser: 2-year follow-up results. World J Urol. 2016; 34(11):1591-1597. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-016-1807-5. View

17.

Hein S, Miernik A, Wilhelm K, Schlager D, Schoeb D, Adams F . Endoscopically Determined Stone Clearance Predicts Disease Recurrence Within 5 Years After Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery. J Endourol. 2016; 30(6):644-9. DOI: 10.1089/end.2016.0101. View

18.

Zeng G, Zhu W, Liu Y, Fan J, Zhao Z, Cai C . The new generation super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SMP) system: a step-by-step guide. BJU Int. 2017; 120(5):735-738. DOI: 10.1111/bju.13955. View

19.

Dretler S . Stone fragility--a new therapeutic distinction. J Urol. 1988; 139(5):1124-7. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)42801-1. View