The Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy with Different Access Sizes for the Single Renal Stone ≤25 mm: A Randomized Prospective Study

4Citations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to provide a randomized controlled trial comparing the outcomes of different access sizes used in the solo ultrasonic-guided minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL). Methods: From January 2018 to December 2019, a total of 160 cases with single renal stones of <25 mm were randomized to undergo mini-PCNLs with Fr16, Fr18, Fr20, or Fr22 accesses. All accesses were established with the axis of the target calyx as the marker for puncture location and then expanded to the desired size. Hemoglobin reduction, operative time, stone-free rate, complications, etc., were all recorded and assessed. Results: The demographic data were similar, and there were no significantly intergroup differences in stone-free rate, complications, and hospital stay time. The hemoglobin reduction was comparable and was 0.9 ± 0.6, 0.9 ± 0.7, 1.0 ± 0.5, and 1.1 ± 0.7 g/dL for the groups Fr16, Fr18, Fr20, and Fr22, respectively. The operative time was 53.4 ± 14.5, 48.5 ± 15.2, 42.8 ± 13.3, and 43.3 ± 13.1 min for the 4 groups, which decreased significantly from group Fr16 to Fr20, but there was no significant difference between Fr20 and Fr22 groups. Conclusions: The axis of target calyx is a reliable marker for establishment of percutaneous renal access under ultrasonic guidance. The surgical outcomes of different access sizes were comparable, but the operation time was significantly shortened with the increase of size. However, Fr22 was not more efficient than Fr20.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Yu, W., Ruan, Y., Xiong, Z., Zhang, Y., Rao, T., & Cheng, F. (2022). The Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy with Different Access Sizes for the Single Renal Stone ≤25 mm: A Randomized Prospective Study. Urologia Internationalis, 106(5), 440–445. https://doi.org/10.1159/000516914

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