Retrograde intrarenal surgery versus mini-percutaneous nephrolithotripsy to treat renal stones 20 mm or larger in diameter using holmium:YAG laser

Ali, Ayman; Mostafa, Hany; Ismail, Ahmed; Gamal, Mohamed; Salah, Ahmed; Roshdy, Mamdouh

doi:10.4103/ejs.ejs_120_19

Retrograde intrarenal surgery versus mini-percutaneous nephrolithotripsy to treat renal stones 20 mm or larger in diameter using holmium:YAG laser

Authors

Abstract

Objective
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (mini-PCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in the treatment of renal stones 20 mm or larger in the longest diameter using holmium:YAG laser.
Patients and methods
This was a prospective randomized study that included 40 patients who were divided into two groups, with 20 patients each. Group A underwent mini-PCNL using holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy for renal pelvic and calyceal stones. Group B underwent RIRS in which flexible ureteroscopy was used for pelvic and calyceal stones, and semi-rigid ureteroscope was used for only renal pelvic and upper calyceal stones using holmium:YAG laser. In both groups, the procedure outcomes in terms of operative time, blood loss, hospital stay, complications using modified Clavien grading system, the need of auxiliary procedures, and stone-free rates (SFRs) after 3 weeks by using CTUT were evaluated statistically.
Results
Statistical analysis of the data showed that there was significant difference in the operative time, which was higher in RIRS group compared with mini-PCNL group, whereas the blood loss in terms of mean±SD change in pre-treatment and post-treatment hemoglobin levels and the hospital stay were significantly higher in mini-PCNL group compared with RIRS group. The complications using modified Clavien grading system were higher in mini-PCNL group compared with RIRS group. The SFR was higher in mini-PCNL group.
Conclusion
In patients with renal stones 20 mm or larger, results showed that mini-PNCL has significantly shorter operative time with higher blood loss and longer hospital stay compared with RIRS. In both groups, the SFR and the need of the auxiliary procedures were comparable.

Keywords