Difference In Stone-free Rate Research Articles

Robotic pyelolithotomy for the treatment of large renal stones: a single-center experience over seven years.

Urolithiasis prevalence varies globally between 1-20%, influenced by regional factors. Robotic pyelolithotomy (RPL) presents an interesting alternative to PCNL, considered the gold standard for symptomatic stones smaller than 20 mm, as it carries a risk of significant complications. However, studies on RPL are limited, especially in anatomically complex cases, where RPL proves to be particularly useful. The study aims to update and review outcomes of RPL in a high-volume robotic center. A retrospective analysis of 153 patients treated with RPL for staghorn kidney stones at a single center from February 2016 to December 2023 was conducted. Data including demographics, preoperative renal function, stone characteristics, operative and postoperative outcomes, and costs were collected. Stone-free rates (SFR) and complications were assessed at follow-up intervals up to 12 months post-surgery. The study showed an initial 3-month stone-free rate (SFR) of 93.5%, which decreased to 83.5% at 12-months. This trend may reflect new stone formation rather than procedure failure. Sub-analysis revealed a significant difference in SFR between patients with pelvic and pyelocalyceal stones at each follow-up. Multivariate regression analysis identified in the pyelocalyceal group that higher BMI and larger stones were associated with higher failure rates at both 6 and 12 months. RPL is a safe and effective treatment for large renal stones, offering a high SFR and low complication rate. It is particularly beneficial in cases with complex anatomy or requiring concurrent renal procedures. However, patient selection is crucial, considering factors like stone location and size. Further research is needed to compare RPL with other treatment methods.

Efficacy and safety of flexible ureteral lithotripsy for upper urinary tract calculi in patients aged 80 years and older

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of flexible ureteral lithotripsy (FURL) for treating upper urinary tract calculi in patients ≥80 years. Methods: This study retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 297 elderly patients who underwent FURL for unilateral upper urinary tract calculi at Beijing Hospital from January 2019 to September 2023. Patients were divided into elderly group (≥80 years) and low-middle aged group (≥60-<80 years). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match preoperative clinical data of patients. After PSM, the basic, perioperative and postoperative data of the two groups were compared. Results: After PSM, 116 patients were enrolled, including 58 patients in each group. The age [M (Q1, Q3)] of elderly group was 83.0 (81.0, 86.0) years, which included 29 males. The age of low-middle aged group was 69.5 (64.8, 74.0) years, which included 33 males. The duration of postoperative hospitalization [M (Q1, Q3)] in elderly group was longer than that in low-middle aged group [2 (1, 3) d vs 1 (1, 2) d, P=0.002]. Serious postoperative complications occurred in 3 cases in the elderly group and 1 case in the low-middle aged group, respectively, without surgical intervention. There was no significant statistical difference in stone-free rate (SFR) [79.3% (46/58) vs 84.5% (49/58)], operation time [M (Q1, Q3), 70.0 (48.3, 100.0) vs 65.0 (46.5, 101.2) min] and postoperative complication rate [25.9% (15/58) vs 22.4% (13/58)] between two groups (all P>0.05). Conclusions: In the treatment of upper urinary tract calculi in patients ≥80 years, the SFR, operation time and postoperative complication rate of FURL are comparable to those in low-middle aged elderly patients. FURL has good safety and effectiveness in the treatment of upper urinary tract calculi in patients ≥80 years.

Holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser with MOSES technology is more efficient than thulium fibre laser in supine mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

To address the paucity of literature comparing outcomes achieved with utilisation of the high-power holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser with MOSES technology vs those achieved with the thulium fibre laser (TFL) in mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). A retrospective review was performed of patients undergoing supine mini-PCNL between August 2021 and May 2023. Exclusion criteria were urinary diversion, simultaneous utilisation of >1 laser platform, use of any other form of fragmentation, and ureteric stones. The Ho:YAG platform (Lumenis Pulse P120H™ with MOSES technology, 120W; Boston Scientific®) and the TFL (Soltive SuperPulsed Thulium Fibre [SPTF], 60W; Olympus®) were compared. Data on stone-free rate (SFR) were determined by computed tomography performed on the first postoperative day and presented as absence of stone fragments, no fragments larger than 2 mm, or no fragments larger than 4 mm. A total of 100 patients met the inclusion criteria, 51 mini-PCNLs with the Ho:YAG laser and 49 with the SPTF laser. No significant differences in demographics or stone characteristics were detected between the two groups. The Ho:YAG laser utilised less energy and time, resulting in higher ablation efficiency (P < 0.05) and less total operating time (P < 0.05). Overall, there was no difference in SFR in any category between the Ho:YAG group and the SPTF group (no fragments: relative risk [RR] 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-1.12, P = 0.21; fragments <2 mm: RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.67-1.10, P = 0.23; fragments <4 mm: RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.80-1.15, P = 0.67). Although we observed an equivalent postoperative SFR, this study supports a shorter operating time and greater intra-operative laser efficiency with the Ho:YAG laser over the SPTF laser in mini-PCNL.

Comparison of the effectiveness of two adjustable negative pressure ureteral access sheaths combined with flex ureteroscopy for ≤ 2cm renal stones.

To compare the safety and effectiveness of the combination of intelligent intrarenal pressure control platforms (IPCP) and flexible ureteral access sheath (FUAS) combined with retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the treatment of renal stones less than 2cm. We retrospectively collected 383 patients with renal stones who underwent RIRS in our department from June 2022 to October 2023. Inclusion criteria: stone length or the sum of multiple stone lengths ≤ 2cm. Finally, 99 cases were included and divided into an IPCP group (n = 40) and FUAS group (n = 59) based on surgical methods. The main endpoint was the stone-free rate (SFR) at third months after surgery, with no residual stones or stone fragments less than 2mm defined as stone clearance. The secondary endpoints were surgical time and perioperative complications, including fever, sepsis, septic shock, and perirenal hematoma. There was no statistically significant difference in general information between the two groups, including age, gender, body mass index, comorbidities, stone side, stone location, stone length, urine bacterial culture, and hydronephrosis. The operation time for IPCP group and FUAS group was 56.83 ± 21.33 vs 55.47 ± 19.69min (p = 0.747). The SFR of IPCP group and FUAS group on the first postoperative day was 75.00% vs 91.50% (p = 0.024). The SFR was 90.00% vs 94.90% in the third month (p = 0.349).In IPCP group, there were 11 cases with stones located in the lower renal calyces and 17 cases in FUAS group. The SFR of the two groups on the first day and third months after surgery were 45.50% vs 88.20% (p = 0.014) and 63.60% vs 94.10% (p = 0.040), respectively, with statistical differences. For kidney stones ≤ 2cm, there was no difference in SFR and the incidence of infection-related complications between IPCP and FUAS combined with RIRS, both of which were superior to T-RIRS. For lower renal caliceal stones, FUAS has a higher SFR compared to IPCP.

Stone Free Success Rate by Using Modified Guy’s Scoring System in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy

Background: Renal stone disease (RSD) is a prevalent condition globally, with significant impacts on patient health and healthcare systems. The complexity of RSD management, particularly in achieving high stone-free rates (SFR) with minimal complications, necessitates ongoing research into effective treatment modalities. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) has emerged as a standard treatment, but predicting its success pre-operatively remains a challenge. Objective: The study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the Modified Guy’s Stone Score (M-GSS) in predicting the SFR in patients undergoing PCNL, and to analyze the relationship between various patient and stone characteristics and the success of the procedure. Methods: This descriptive case series study involved 161 patients undergoing PCNL at a tertiary care center. Data on patient demographics, stone characteristics, and operative details were collected. Stones were classified using the M-GSS, and PCNL outcomes were assessed in terms of SFR. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 23.0, with a focus on the correlation between M-GSS grades and SFR. Results: The overall SFR was 59.6%. The majority of patients (38.5%) were classified as M-GSS grade 1. The mean stone size was 2.74 ± 1.6 cm, and the mean operative time was 73.4 ± 14.6 minutes. There was no significant difference in SFR across different M-GSS grades (p=0.236). Stone size was the only factor significantly affecting the SFR (p=0.0001). Conclusion: The study indicates that while M-GSS is a useful tool for preoperative assessment in PCNL, stone size remains a crucial determinant of SFR. The findings suggest the need for further research, particularly larger, multi-center randomized studies, to validate these results and refine preoperative patient counseling and outcome prediction strategies in PCNL.

Influence of tract location on the outcomes of endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery: A retrospective analysis of 1000 cases.

This study aimed to investigate the influence of tract location on surgical outcomes in endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery (ECIRS), considering the location of residual stones. From January 2015 to December 2021, 1417 consecutive patients underwent ECIRS in three hospitals. After excluding patients with preoperative percutaneous nephrostomy, intended multi-stage procedures, those with a tract in the renal pelvis, and those with multiple tracts, 1000 patients were retrospectively analysed by comparing three groups based on tract location: group 1 (upper calyx), group 2 (middle calyx), and group 3 (lower calyx). A multivariate logistic regression model was implemented to assess whether the tract location independently affected the stone-free status. Patient characteristics were significantly different among the groups in terms of age, stone laterality, presence of calyceal stones, and hydronephrosis. There were no differences in stone-free rate (SFR) among the three groups. Multivariate analysis indicated that the tract location (group 1 or 2 compared with group 3) did not significantly affect the stone-free status (odds ratio = 1.4, 0.9-1.9, p = 0.066). Surgical duration significantly varied among the groups, with the shortest time observed in group 1. Organ injury was observed exclusively in group 1 (1.13%). Residual fragments were predominantly found in the lower calyx, with the calyx associated with the tract being the second most common location. Tract location does not significantly affect SFR. To improve the SFR, observation of the lower calyx and tract placement is important.

General versus spinal anesthesia in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the preferred treatment for the removal of large kidney stones, sized >20 mm. However, there is still an ongoing debate concerning the best anesthesia for PCNL. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety between general and spinal anesthesia for PCNL. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis study. A systematic, electronic literature search was performed in several databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar until July 1 st, 2022. The quality of the articles was examined using Crombie's Items (for non-randomized controlled trials(RCTs)) and Jadad Scale (for RCTs). The outcomes assessed were operation time, fluoroscopy time, length of stay, stone-free rate, overall complication rate, specific postoperative complications, cost, pain score, and postoperative analgesic requirement. The article selection was reported based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. We assessed four RCTs and eight retrospective studies. Meta-analysis of selected studies was performed using the Review Manager 5.3. Results: General anesthesia resulted in fewer Clavien-Dindo grade II (OR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.49 - 0.94; p=0.02), major complications (OR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.45 - 0.94; p=0.02, and lower transfusion rates (OR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.53 - 0.94; p=0.02). Whereas spinal anesthesia resulted in faster operation time (Mean Difference: -12.98; 95% CI: -20.56 - -5.41; p<0.001, fluoroscopy time (MD: -26.15; 95% CI: -42.79 - -9.50; p=0.002), reduced length of stay (MD: -0.47; 95% CI: -0.75 - 0.20; p<0.001), and lower postoperative analgesic requirement and cost. No significant difference in stone-free rate (OR: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.92 - 1.26; p=0.37). PCNL performed using either general anesthesia or spinal anesthesia is equally safe and effective. Conclusions: Each method of anesthesia has its own advantages and disadvantages. The final choice between general and spinal anesthesia should be based on the patient's condition and surgical team preference.

A systematic review of postoperative outcomes of kidney stone surgery and meta-analysis of outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in individuals with spinal cord injury.

Systematic review and meta-analysis. To evaluate outcomes of surgical treatment for nephrolithiasis in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). We systematically reviewed the Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and Web of Science databases for studies examining outcomes of kidney stone procedures in individuals with SCI. Our primary outcomes were stone-free rate (SFR) and complications as categorized by Clavien-Dindo classification. A meta-analysis of comparative studies was performed to assess differences in SFR and complication rate between individuals with and without SCI following PCNL. A total of 27 retrospective and observational articles were included. Interventions for kidney stones included PCNL, shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), and ureteroscopy. Pooled SFR in individuals with SCI was 54%, for SWL, 74% for PCNL, and 36% for ureteroscopy. Meta-analyses found that there was higher rate of grades I (OR 9.54; 95% CI, 3.06 to 29.79), II (OR 3.38; 95% CI, 1.85 to 6.18), and III-V (OR 2.38; 95% CI, 1.35 to 4.19) complications in individuals with SCI compared to non-SCI individuals following PCNL. The rate of infectious complications was also higher in individuals with SCI (OR 6.15; 95% CI, 1.86 to 20.39). However, there was no difference in SFR (OR 0.64; 95% CI, 0.15 to 2.64) between groups. Individuals with SCI are at higher risk of minor, major, and infectious complications following PCNL compared to non-SCI individuals. There was no significant difference between groups in SFR following PCNL, suggesting that PCNL is an effective surgery for kidney stones in individuals with SCI.

Efficacy and Safety of Holmium Laser Lithotripsy for Renal Calculi in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery: A Comparative Study in Libyan Patients

Background Kidney stones are a common problem that can be treated by different surgical methods. The choice of treatment depends on the stone and patient characteristics and the local resources and skills of the urologists. Aim The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes regarding the safety and effectiveness of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) using holmium laser lithotripsy for kidney stones sizes of less than or equal to 20, and more than 20 mm. Methods The study was conducted on 54 patients with renal calculi at a single center using RIRS and holmium lithotripsy from April 2022 to April 2023. Stone size was calculated by summing up the diameters of all renal calculi, and stone-free rate (SFR) was defined as no stone or stone fragment less than 1 mm in the kidney. Results are described as mean ± standard deviation, frequency, and percentages. Chi-squared or unpaired t-tests are used for comparison between different groups as appropriate. A p-value less than 0.05 is considered significant. Results The mean intrarenal stone size was 17.8 ± 7.6 mm, with a significant difference in stone size less than or equal to 20 mm and stone size more than 20 mm (19 ± 4.7 and 35 ± 4 mm, respectively). The main operation time was 66 ± 36.5 minutes, with significantly longer operation time for patients with kidney stones more than 20 mm (94.9 ± 34.5 vs. 49 ± 26 for stone size ≤20 mm). There was no difference in the length of stay after operation between the two different stone sizes. The overall immediate SFR was 64.4%, where stone size less than or equal to 20 mm showed a significantly higher SFR (83%) than SFR for stone size more than 20 mm (31%). This SFR increased to 91.1% 1 month later, with 100% clearance for stones size less than or equal to 20 mm compared with only 68% for stones size more than 20 mm. The overall complication rate was 9.2%, most of them were due to urinary tract infections (5 cases) that required intravenous antibiotics. Stone size had no significant effect on the complication rate. There was no significant difference in SFR between lower calyceal stone and other sites of stone. Conclusion RIRS combined with holmium laser lithotripsy is a valuable treatment option for patients with renal stones particularly for patients with stones size of less than or equal to 20 mm with a relatively low rate and severity of complications.

Vacuum-assisted access sheath in supine mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL)

IntroductionThe vacuum-assisted access sheath is a new device for the treatment of kidney stones with percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). ObjectiveOur aim was to compare the stone-free rate (SFR) and complications between standard mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (Mini-PCNL) and vacuum-assisted PCNL (Va-PCNL). MethodsRetrospective study of patients undergoing Mini-PCNL and Va-PCNL from January 2018 to June 2022. Va-PCNL was performed with a disposable sheath (ClearPetra®) with continuous high-flow irrigation and vacuum fluid dynamics for easier stone fragment removal. Baseline patient characteristics, surgical outcomes, perioperative and postoperative data were collected. We compared SFR and complications. ResultsA total of 136 patients were identified, 57 (41,9%) underwent Va-PCNL and 79 (58,15%) Mini-PCNL. Mean operative time was significantly shorter in the Va-PCNL group (95 min.) than in Mini-PCNL (146 min; P = ,001) group. The tubeless technique was performed more frequently in Va-PCNL group (61,4% vs. 34,2%; P = ,002). We did not observe any differences in postoperative complications. The mean hospital stay was significantly lower in Va-PCNL with 1,7 ± 1,9 days per patient compared with 2,7 ± 1,5 days in the Mini-PCNL group (P = ,001). There were no differences in SFR at 3 months between Va-PCNL (71,9%) and Mini-PCNL (71,8%; P =v ,848). ConclusionPatients treated with Va-PCNL had comparable results to Mini-PCNL, showing equal SFR with similar infectious complications rates. Potential benefits of Va-PCNL include shorter operative time and postoperative stay.

Different ureteral access sheaths sizes for retrograde intrarenal surgery.

There is a trend toward miniaturization in endourological stone therapy. Good visibility, intrarenal pressures and temperature control should be ensured by ureteral sheaths. In the context of the present study, 10/12Charr. sheaths and 12/14Charr. sheaths for flexible ureterorenoscopy were investigated regarding stone-free rate, complication rate and efficacy for laser lithotripsy. From January 2020 to January 2022, 100 patients each with kidney stone up to 1.5cm in diameter were included in the study. Use of a 12/14Charr. vs. 10/12Charr. ureteral sheath for flexible ureterorenoscopy was compared. Perioperative data, stone size, volume and density, laser energy, laser duration, stone-free rates and complications based on Clavien-Dindo classification were retrospectively analyzed. For both groups of ureteral access sheaths, there were no differences in median surgery duration (10/12Charr: 29min (7-105min) vs. 12/14Charr: 34min (9-95min); p = 0.33), overall complication rate (p = 0.61) and hospitalization (p = 0.155). There were no differences in stone-free rates (97.9% vs. 92.7%, p = 0.37). Laser lithotripsy duration usingholmium laser was 1.9min (0.1-10.8min) vs. 3.8min (0.2-20.7min) (p < 0.01) and applied laser energy was 3.1J (0.15J-10.29J) vs. 6.8J (1.07J-26.77J) (p < 0.01) for 12/14Charr. sheaths and 10/12Charr. sheaths, respectively. In terms of stone-free rates, there are no differences between the 10/12 and 12/14Charr. ureteral access sheaths. The laser duration and energy was increased with 10/12Charr. sheaths without showing increased risk for clinical complications like trauma or inflammation.

Uso de vaina asistida por vacío en mininefrolitotomía percutánea (mini-NLPC) en decúbito supino

IntroductionThe vacuum-assisted access sheath is a new device for the treatment of kidney stones with percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). ObjectiveOur aim was to compare the stone-free rate (SFR) and complications between standard mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) and vacuum-assisted PCNL (Va-PCNL). MethodsRetrospective study of patients undergoing mini-PCNL and Va-PCNL from January 2018 to June 2022. Va-PCNL was performed with a disposable sheath (ClearPetra) with continuous high-flow irrigation and vacuum fluid dynamics for easier stone fragment removal. Baseline patient characteristics, surgical outcomes, perioperative and postoperative data were collected. We compared SFR and complications. ResultsA total of 136 patients were identified, 57 (41,9%) underwent Va-PCNL and 79 (58,15%) mini-PCNL. Mean operative time was significantly shorter in the Va-PCNL group (95 min.) than in mini-PCNL (146 min.; P = .001) group. The tubeless technique was performed more frequently in Va-PCNL group (61,4% vs. 34,2%; P = .002). We did not observe any differences in postoperative complications. The mean hospital stay was significantly lower in Va-PCNL with 1,7 ± 1,9 days per patient compared with 2,7 ± 1,5 days in the mini-PCNL group (P = .001). There were no differences in SFR at 3 months between Va-PCNL (71,9%) and mini-PCNL (71,8%; P = .848). ConclusionPatients treated with Va-PCNL had comparable results to mini-PCNL, showing equal SFR with similar infectious complications rates. Potential benefits of Va-PCNL include shorter operative time and postoperative stay.

MP39-10 SIMULTANEOUS BILATERAL PCNL: IS IT COST-EFFECTIVE?

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023MP39-10 SIMULTANEOUS BILATERAL PCNL: IS IT COST-EFFECTIVE? Kevin Wymer, Ben Johnson, Austen Slade, Daniel Heidenberg, Mitchell Humphreys, Karen Stern, and Marcelino Rivera Kevin WymerKevin Wymer More articles by this author , Ben JohnsonBen Johnson More articles by this author , Austen SladeAusten Slade More articles by this author , Daniel HeidenbergDaniel Heidenberg More articles by this author , Mitchell HumphreysMitchell Humphreys More articles by this author , Karen SternKaren Stern More articles by this author , and Marcelino RiveraMarcelino Rivera More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003277.10AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Large, bilateral stone burden can present a unique challenge for both the urologist and patient. When bilateral PCNL is warranted, surgical timing can lead to differences in stone free rate (SFR), complications, and costs. This study compares the cost-effectiveness of simultaneous versus staged PCNL. METHODS: A decision-analytic Markov model was used to assess the cost-effectiveness of simultaneous (bilateral PCNL during a single operative episode for the index procedure) and staged (unilateral PCNL for the index procedure followed by a separate procedure for a contralateral PCNL) PCNL for the management of large, bilateral stone burden. Model probabilities and outcomes for index procedures, including SFR, complications, operative time, and hospital length of stay (LOS), were drawn from a large-volume, single-center cohort. Outcomes for secondary procedures and utility values were obtained from the literature. Primary outcomes included costs from a Medicare standpoint with the addition of operative time and LOS costs, effectiveness (quality adjusted life years, QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of the model. RESULTS: At 1 year following the index procedure, costs (inclusive of index procedure, secondary procedures, and complications) per patient were $52,585 and $61,687 for simultaneous and staged PCNL, respectively. In addition to being less costly, simultaneous PCNL also resulted in slightly higher QALYs (.982) compared to staged PCNL (.977). On one-way sensitivity analyses (Figure), staged PCNL became cost-effective if the SFR increased from 56% to 88% (40% greater per renal unit relative to simultaneous PCNL) or the cost of unilateral PCNL decreased approximately 50% to $4,699 ($16,266 less than simultaneous PCNL). CONCLUSIONS: Even when assuming a modest reduction in SFR (62% vs. 44% per renal unit), longer index procedure OR time (177 vs. 116 minutes) and LOS (3.2 vs. 2.3 days) and slightly higher major (6.2% vs. 5.5%) and minor (27.2% vs. 21.3%) complication rates at index procedure, simultaneous bilateral PCNL was both less costly and more effective at 1 year follow up relative to staged bilateral PCNL. This offers further support of simultaneous bilateral PCNL in the proper clinical setting. Source of Funding: None © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e538 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Kevin Wymer More articles by this author Ben Johnson More articles by this author Austen Slade More articles by this author Daniel Heidenberg More articles by this author Mitchell Humphreys More articles by this author Karen Stern More articles by this author Marcelino Rivera More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

General versus spinal anesthesia in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the preferred treatment for the removal of large kidney stones, sized &gt;20 mm. However, there is still an ongoing debate concerning the best anesthesia for PCNL. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety between general and spinal anesthesia for PCNL. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis study. A systematic, electronic literature search was performed in several databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar until July 1st, 2022. The quality of the articles was examined using Crombie's Items (for non-randomized controlled trials (RCTs)) and Jadad Scale (for RCTs). The outcomes assessed were operation time, fluoroscopy time, length of stay, stone-free rate, overall complication rate, specific postoperative complications, cost, pain score, and postoperative analgesic requirement. The article selection was reported based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. We assessed four RCTs and eight retrospective studies. Meta-analysis of selected studies was performed using the Review Manager 5.3. Results: General anesthesia resulted in fewer Clavien–Dindo grade II (OR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.49 – 0.94; p=0.02), major complications (OR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.45 – 0.94; p=0.02, and lower transfusion rates (OR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.53 – 0.94; p=0.02). Whereas spinal anesthesia resulted in faster operation time (Mean Difference: -12.98; 95% CI: -20.56 – -5.41; p&lt;0.001, fluoroscopy time (MD: -26.15; 95% CI: -42.79 – -9.50; p=0.002), reduced length of stay (MD: -0.47; 95% CI: -0.75 – 0.20; p&lt;0.001), and lower postoperative analgesic requirement and cost. No significant difference in stone-free rate (OR: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.92 – 1.26; p=0.37). PCNL performed using either general anesthesia or spinal anesthesia is equally safe and effective. Conclusions: Each method of anesthesia has its own advantages and disadvantages. The final choice between general and spinal anesthesia should be based on the patient's condition and surgical team preference.

Comparison of stone-free rate between percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery.

The management of urolithiasis in the kidney has been drastically changed in the era of endourology, mainly consisting of three surgical procedures: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Since ESWL is usually less invasive via ambulatory clinic routes, this study aimed to examine the stone-free rate (SFR) between PCNL and RIRS. We retrospectively reviewed patients who had renal stones and were treated with either PCNL or RIRS from June 2016 to June 2018. Staghorn stones, stones with diameters <1 cm, and stones with diameters >2 cm were excluded. Patients who underwent multiple surgeries for bilateral renal stones and those with graft kidney stones were excluded from the study. X-ray, sonography, and/or computed tomography (CT) were used to calculate the size of the stones. Follow-up was evaluated by the same image examination within three months after surgery. Stone-free was defined as no residual stone or the presence of asymptomatic calculi <4 mm. The operation time was defined as a skin-to-skin interval. Following exclusion criteria, there were 39 patients in each arm, with no difference in age, sex, or any other demographic data. The average stone size in the PCNL and RIRS groups was 16.3 and 14.0 mm, respectively ( p = 0.009). There was no significant difference in SFR (71.8% vs 61.5%, p = 0.337); the operation time was significant longer ( p < 0.001), and the hospital stay was significantly shorter ( p < 0.001) in the RIRS group. PCNL and RIRS are both feasible options for managing kidney stones. However, the initial stone size might affect the selection of operation. The SFR in the PCNL group was numerically but not statistically higher. The RIRS group, on the other hand, had a longer operation time but a shorter hospital stays.

Management of large kidney stones in the geriatric population.

The aim of this review is to highlight the unique factors that predispose geriatric patients to nephrolithiasis and to compare the utility and efficacy of surgical techniques in this specific patient population. PubMed and EMBASE databases were reviewed, and studies were organized according to surgical treatments. Few prospective studies exist comparing kidney stone removal in the elderly to younger cohorts. In addition, various age cut-offs were used to determine who was considered elderly. Most studies which analyzed Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL) found a slightly higher rate of minor complications but comparable stone free rate and operative time. For ureteroscopy (URS) and extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL), there were minimal complications observed and no difference in clinical success in the elderly. All surgical techniques were presumed to be safe in the elderly and most found no difference in stone-free rates. Unique attributes of the geriatric population contribute to stone formation and must be considered when determining appropriate management modalities. This review provides an overview of the utility and efficacy of PCNL, URS and ESWL in the elderly, as well as a porposed algorithm for management in this population.

Oblique supine position versus prone position for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

To compare the efficacy and safety of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in the oblique supine position (OSP) and the prone position (PP). To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of OSP versus PP for PCNL. A systematic literature search of PubMed, Ovid, SCOPUS, and citation lists was conducted to identify eligible comparative studies up to November 2022. All studies comparing OSP versus PP for PCNL were included. Statistical analysis was performed with the Collaboration's Review Manager (RevMan) 5.4 software. Overall, eight studies were included involving 1185 patients (OSP = 634; PP = 551). There were no statistically significant differences between OSP and PP in age (WMD = -0.95 years; 95% CI: -2.12 to 0.21; p = 0.83) or proportion of male patients (OR = 0.02; 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.08; p = 0.43). We found that OSP was performed more frequently for smaller stone size and patients with higher BMI (WMD = -0.1 cm, 95% CI: -0.18 to -0.02; p = 0.01) and patients with higher BMI (WMD = 0.66 kg/m2; 95% CI: 0.29 to 1.03; p = 0.0005). The operation time was shorter in OSP than PP (WMD = -14 min; 95% CI: -27.00 to -1.00; p = 0.03). The reduction of hemoglobin was lower in OSP than PP (WMD = -0.39 g/dl; 95% CI: -0.60 to -0.13; p = 0.03). There was no significant difference in stone-free rate and hospitalization between the two groups (OR = 1.32; 95% CI: 0.98 to 1.78; p = 0.07; WMD = -5.99 h; 95% CI: -17.15 to 5.16; p = 0.29). The overall complications were fewer in OSP than in PP (OR = 0.59; 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.81; p = 0.001), but no difference was observed between the positions with regard to the major complications (Clavien-Dindo score ≥ 3) (OR = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.43 to 1.34; p = 0.35). OSP showed non-inferior stone-free rate, blood loss, and hospitalization compared with PP. OSP may be superior in terms of operative time and complications than PP.

Safety and efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy vs. flexible ureteroscopy in the treatment of urinary calculi: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) and flexible ureteroscopy lithotripsy (f-URS) in treating urinary tract stones. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for literature comparing SWL with f-URS. The primary outcomes we focused on were stone-free rate (SFR) and complications; the secondary outcomes were operation time, hospital stay, retreatment rate, number of sessions, and auxiliary procedures rate. We used ReviewManager version 5.4.1 and STATA version 14.2 for meta-analysis. Seventeen studies with a total of 2,265 patients were included in the meta-analysis, including 1,038 patients in the SWL group and 1,227 patients in the f-URS group. The meta-analysis indicated that patients in the f-URS group had higher SFR than those in the SWL group [odds ratio (OR): 2.00, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.29-3.12, p = 0.002]. In addition, we found no significant difference in complications (OR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.85-1.37) between the two treatments. Also, we found that the retreatment rate and the auxiliary procedure rate in the f-URS group were significantly lower than those in the SWL group (OR: 0.08, 95% CI: 0.02-0.24, p < 0.00001; OR: 0.30, 95% CI: 0.11-0.83, p = 0.02). Moreover, the number of sessions in the f-URS group was significantly lower than that in the SWL group [mean difference (MD): -1.96, 95% CI: -1.55 to -0.33, p = 0.003]. However, the operation time and hospital stay in the f-URS group were significantly longer than those in the SWL group (MD: 11.24, 95% CI: 3.51-18.56, p = 0.004; MD: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.85-1.42, p < 0.00001). For 1-2-cm urinary stones, f-URS can achieve a higher SFR than SWL while having a lower retreatment rate, number of sessions, and auxiliary procedure rate. For urinary stones <1 cm, there was no significant difference in SFR between SWL and f-URS groups. The SWL group has a shorter operative time and hospital stay than the f-URS group.

Efficacy and safety of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in elderly patients: Experience of 128 cases

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in elderly patients (≥65 years) with kidney stones &gt; 2 cm in size.&#x0D; PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients aged ≥65 years who underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy for kidney stones between January 2015 and January 2022 were included in this study. Patient profiles, preoperative stone data, operative information, and postoperative complications were reviewed. We applied the Guys Stone score to predict the net results of percutaneous nephrolithotomy.&#x0D; RESULTS: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy was performed on 128 geriatric patients. Of these patients, 68 (53.1%) were male and 60 (46.9%) were female. The mean age was 69.87 ± 7.06 (65–80) years. The mean stone size was 28.7 ± 6.5 mm (22–46 mm). The mean operative time was 90.33 ± 40.56 min and fluoroscopy time was 5.16 ± 2.81 min. The reentry catheter was removed after an average of 3.21 ± 1.82 days. The mean duration of hospital stay was 3.17 ± 2.19 days. The stone-free survival rate was 90.6%. Transfusion was performed in four (3.1%) patients due to hemorrhage, and urine extravasation from the re-entry tract occurred in eight (6.2%) patients, and this required Double j-stent placement. When the four Guys stone score groups were compared, there was a statistically significant difference in stone-free rates (p = 0.001).&#x0D; CONCLUSIONS: According to our results, percutaneous nephrolithotomy is a safe and effective treatment option for nephrolithiasis in the elderly, with high stone-free and acceptable complication rates.

Primary versus delayed ureteroscopy for ureteric stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Ureteric colic is a major clinical and economic burden on the National Health Service. There has been a recent paradigm shift to consider definitive surgery as the primary intervention at the time of initial presentation. Objective: To systematically evaluate the outcomes of primary/emergency ureteroscopy versus delayed/elective ureteroscopy. Methods: We performed a critical review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials–CENTRAL, CINAHL, Clinicaltrials.gov, Google Scholar and individual urological journals in April 2020. A robust database search was performed using a combination of the terms ‘primary ureteroscopy’, ‘immediate ureteroscopy’, ‘delayed ureteroscopy’ and ‘emergency ureteroscopy’. Adult patients (&gt; 16 years) with ureteric stones presenting as an emergency were included. Results: Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria, with 4 studies directly comparing primary/emergency to delayed/elective ureteroscopy for an acute presentation of ureteric colic. Across the studies, 1708 patients underwent primary/emergency ureteroscopy for ureteric calculi and 990 underwent delayed ureteroscopy. No significant differences in stone-free rates were found between both groups with primary/emergency achieving 85% and delayed/elective 91% ( p = 0.68). The majority of stones treated were located in the distal ureter in both groups. Overall, there were no differences in complications between the groups ( p = 0.42) or major complications (0.17). However, there were fewer minor complications in the primary URS group ( p = 0.02). Ureteral catheter or double-J stent insertion was used in 71% of delayed/elective ureteroscopy cases, compared to 46.8% of primary/emergency cases (p = 0.001). For patients undergoing primary/emergency ureteroscopy, 6.4% patients required auxiliary procedures. In the delayed/elective group, 7.6% required further definitive treatment (NS). Conclusion: Primary ureteroscopy is a safe and feasible procedure, when performed in suitable patients in the acute setting. It is associated with significantly lower stent usage, equivalent stone clearance, no increase in overall or major complications including sepsis, and fewer minor complications when compared to delayed/elective ureteroscopy. Prospective studies will do well to explore this area further but on current evidence, primary ureteroscopy is the safe procedure. Level of evidence: Not applicable