Retrograde intrarenal surgery vs miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy to treat lower pole renal stones 1.5-2.5 cm in diameter

16Citations
Citations of this article
17Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

AIM To compare the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) in treating lower pole (LP) renal stones with a diameter of 1.5-2.5 cm. METHODS A total of 216 patients who underwent mini-PCNL (n = 103) or RIRS n = 113) for LP stones with a diameter of 1.5-2.5 cm were enrolled between December 2015 and April 2017 at the Urology Department of Ningbo Urology and Nephrology Hospital. RESULTS Significant differences were found in the hospital stay (9.39 ± 4.01 vs 14.08 ± 5.26, P < 0.0001) and hospitalization costs (2624.5 ± 513.36 vs 3255.2 ± 976.5, P < 0.0001) between the RIRS and mini-PCNL groups. The mean operation time was not significantly different between the RIRS group (56.48 ± 24.77) and the mini-PCNL group (60.04 ± 30.38, P = 0.345). The stone-free rates at the first postoperative day (RIRS vs mini-PCNL: 90.2% vs 93.2%, P = 0.822) and the second month postoperatively (RIRS vs mini-PCNL: 93.8% vs 95.1%, P = 0.986) were not significantly different. CONCLUSION RIRS and mini-PCNL are both safe and effective methods for treating LP stones with a diameter of 1.5-2.5 cm. RIRS can be considered as an alternative to PCNL for the treatment for LP stones of 1.5-2.5 cm.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Li, M. M., Yang, H. M., Liu, X. M., Qi, H. G., & Weng, G. B. (2018). Retrograde intrarenal surgery vs miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy to treat lower pole renal stones 1.5-2.5 cm in diameter. World Journal of Clinical Cases, 6(15), 931–935. https://doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v6.i15.931

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free