A comparison among PCNL, Miniperc and Ultraminiperc for lower calyceal stones between 1 and 2 cm: a prospective, comparative, multicenter and randomised study

Small tools, big impact and redefining endourology: the paradigm shift of ureteroscopy for large stones and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for small stones - a literature review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We aim to review the evolving paradigm in endourology, where technology has led us to manage small stones with ureteroscopy (URS) and large stones with miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) techniques. We analyse recent literature, their findings, emerging trends and newer technologies that are helping redefine modern day endourology in pushing these boundaries.

RECENT FINDINGS

A significant trend is the use of smaller devices to treat larger stones via ureteroscopy, and to treat smaller stones via percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Improved laser technologies, smaller single use ureteroscopes and nephroscopes, suction access sheaths, all play a key role in this.The use of suction sheaths and vacuum assisted devices allows to control intrarenal pressure and help in reducing infectious and other complications whilst improving the stone-free rate (SFR). The treatment choice often depends on surgical expertise and available resources, guided by anatomical factors, stone composition and patient-specific considerations.

SUMMARY

The management of kidney stone disease has undergone a paradigm shift. While ureteroscopy is being done for larger renal stones, miniaturised PCNL is being done for small stones. This has been driven by a surge in technology, but a tailored and patient-centred approach is needed, and must be helped by guidelines and a multidisciplinary approach.

Endourological Management of Renal Stones: A Systematic Review, Bayesian Network Meta-analysis and Meta-regression

OBJECTIVE

To compare stone-free rates (SFRs), operative times, and transfusion rates of various endoscopic techniques for kidney stone management.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed, identifying studies comparing the different endoscopic techniques in patients with renal stones. Studies were grouped by location and size of stones (lower pole, 1-2cm, and >2 cm). Data were extracted to build a Bayesian network modeling the comparisons. Meta-regression adjusted for variations in stone-free definitions. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% credible intervals were reported.

RESULTS

A total of 40 studies were included for analysis, providing a total population of 6696 patients. For lower pole stones, both percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) (OR 2.0 [1.2, 3.3]) and mini-PCNL (OR 2.3 [1.5, 3.6]) showed increased SFRs when compared to retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), while micro-PCNL exhibited a non-significant difference (OR 0.94 [0.39,2.3]). For stones between 1-2cm, mini-PCNL showed an increased SFR (OR 2.5 [1.5,4.1]) when compared to RIRS; however, there was no significant difference in SFR among the rest of the interventions when compared to RIRS. For stones larger than 2 cm, PCNL, mini-PCNL, and ultramini-PCNL resulted in higher SFRs compared to RIRS.

CONCLUSION

For 1-2cm upper pole/interpolar stones, percutaneous approaches except mini-PCNL did not achieve superior SFRs compared to RIRS. For >2 cm stones and lower pole stones, all percutaneous methods, except micro-PCNL, exhibited higher stone clearance than RIRS.

Flank-free modified supine vs. prone position for pediatric nephrolithotripsy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is widely performed as the preferred treatment for kidney stones larger than 20 mm in pediatric patients, with current research focusing on comparing outcomes between prone and supine positions to determine optimal procedural positioning. Therefore, the aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of prone versus supine positioning in pediatric PCNL, providing clarity on this critical aspect of the procedure to guide clinical decision-making.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, Web of Science and Google Scholar. We included studies that compared PCNL in prone vs supine positions for pediatric patients. Our primary outcome was stone-free rate (SFR). Secondary outcomes included operative time, length of hospital stay and overall complications rate. The statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4.

RESULTS

We retrieved 8 articles, with 269 patients in the prone group and 223 patients in the supine group. The mean age of all patients was 7.92 years old. Our findings presented no statistically significant difference in SFR between the two positions (OR 0.67; CI95 0.38, 1.18; p = 0.17; I2 = 0%). Additionally, we noted a significant reduction in operative time in the supine position group (MD 13.75; CI95 4.35, 23.15; p = 0.004; I2 = 84%). At the same time, the length of hospital stay after the procedure was lower in supine group (MD 0.61; CI95 0.34, 0.88; p < 0.0001; I2 = 21%). No difference was observed regarding the total complication rate (OR 1.47; CI95 0.88, 2.47; p = 0.15; I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis suggests that PCNL performed in the prone position is equivalent to supine PCNL in terms of SFR. However, mainly in the RCT studies, we could observe benefits of the supine position in comparison of prone position in terms of lower operative time, as well as a reduced postoperative hospital stay.

Outcomes and Complications of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL): A Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Urolithiasis is extremely prevalent in Pakistan, with percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) emerging as the primary treatment modality over traditional open surgery. Despite its effectiveness, PCNL is associated with a risk of complications and residual stones. There is limited data on PCNL outcomes from Southern Punjab, necessitating an evaluation of its efficacy and safety in this region.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 399 patients who underwent PCNL at a tertiary care hospital in Muzaffargarh, Pakistan, between October 2016 and September 2022. Detailed preoperative assessments, surgical procedures, and postoperative outcomes were reviewed. Stone clearance and complication rates were assessed, and factors influencing these outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

The median age of the study population was 39 years, with a male predominance. Stone clearance was achieved in 80.45% (321) of cases, with higher success rates observed in lower pole punctures. Complications occurred in 2% (13) of patients, predominantly hydrothorax following upper pole puncture. Patients with comorbidities had a higher risk of complications (P = 0.097). Residual stones were more common in staghorn stones and larger stone sizes (>3-4 cm). The median operative time was 60 minutes, shorter than reported in the literature, reflecting surgical expertise.

CONCLUSION

PCNL is an effective and safe treatment option for urolithiasis in Southern Punjab, Pakistan, with favorable stone clearance rates and low complication rates. Tailoring treatment strategies based on patient characteristics and optimizing surgical techniques are essential for improving outcomes in this population.

Comparison of conventional (basketing + dusting) and Moses (pop-dusting) holmium lasers during flexible ureteroscopy in the treatment of renal stones between 2 and 3 cm: a randomized clinical trial

To investigate the feasibility of conventional (basketing + dusting) and Moses (pop-dusting) holmium lasers during flexible ureteroscopy (FURS) in the treatment of 2-3 cm renal calculi and to compare the efficiency and safety of the two methods, a total of 230 patients with 2-3 cm kidney stones who underwent FURS were randomly divided into the conventional group and the Moses group. The mode of lithotripsy in the conventional group was fragmentation and dusting. The mode of lithotripsy in the Moses group was dusting and pop-dusting. Clinical and perioperative variables and complications were compared between the two cohorts. Multivariate analyses of factors contributing to the stone-free rate (SFR) and operation time were performed. No statistically significant differences were found in the demographics, renal stone-related data, SFR, or complications between the cohorts. The laser energy was higher in the Moses cohort than in the conventional cohort (119.3 ± 15.2 vs. 92.8 ± 15.1 kJ; P < 0.001), and the operation time was shorter in the Moses cohort than in the conventional cohort (99.5 ± 18.9 vs. 105.3 ± 13.7 min; P = 0.009). When there was isolated stone, the operation time was shorter in the Moses cohort than in the conventional cohort (99.6 ± 17.5 vs. 111.4 ± 10.7 min; P < 0.001), while there was no significant difference between the two cohorts when there were multiple stones (99.5 ± 20 vs. 101.2 ± 14 min; P = 0.415). Multivariate analyses found that an increase in stone volume can decrease the SFR and prolong the operation time, and use of a Moses laser can shorten the operation time. Both holmium laser modes during FURS can effectively treat 2-3 cm renal calculi. The Moses mode is recommended as the first choice for the treatment of isolated 2-3 cm renal stones. When treating multiple stones, the efficiency of these two laser modalities is the same. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ChiCTR2200056091.

Miniaturizing the approach to upper tract renal calculi: Is smaller always better? A narrative review

Newer modalities for treating upper tract urinary stones focus on maintaining and improving outcomes, reducing complications, and optimizing patient care. This narrative review aims to outline novel miniaturized endourological innovations for managing upper tract calculi.

Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Outcomes in the Obese Population: A Retrospective Review

Introduction and Objectives: Mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) has gained popularity over the last decade due to its stone-free rate comparable to traditional PCNL but with decreased risk of complications. While the data on mini-PCNL has been favorable thus far, no study today has evaluated outcomes in obese patients. Methods: All patients undergoing mini-PCNL at our institution since we began its use in 2019 were included in this study. Mini-PCNL was defined as access sheath ≤22F in size. An obese group with body mass index (BMI) ≥30 was compared to a nonobese group with BMI <30. A patient was considered relatively stone free if residual fragments were <4 mm on follow-up CT with ≤3 mm cuts. Fisher exact test was used to compare dichotomous differences between variables, and t-test to compare continuous variables. Results: We identified 67 patients who underwent mini-PCNL during the study period with 33 patients in the obese group. Median BMI in the obese group was 36.4 kg/m2 compared to 25.05 kg/m2 in nonobese. There were no blood transfusions in either group during the study period. There was no statistical difference between the obese vs nonobese group for age, access sheath size, change in hemoglobin, same day discharge, percent relatively stone free, emergency department visit within 30 days, and median largest single stone diameter. There was a significant difference in the sum of all treated stone diameter in the obese group (median 15 mm) vs nonobese (median 18 mm, p = 0.02) (Table 1). Conclusion: Mini-PCNL appears to be equally safe and effective in obese and nonobese patients alike. While there was a statistically significantly higher amount of overall stone burden in the nonobese groups, the overall difference is not clinically significant. Further research is needed to validate our experience.

Efficacy and safety of surgical treatment for 1-2 cm sized lower pole of renal stone: network meta-analysis of randomized control trials

The management of medium-sized (1-2 cm) lower poles renal stone has been a contentious topic for endourologists. There are limited evidences to answer the best management options for medium-sized lower pole renal stone. This network meta-analysis provided high-level evidences on efficacy and safety of profile of PCNL, Mini-PCNL, Ultra-PCNL, RIRS, Micro-PCNL, SWL for management of medium-sized lower pole renal stone. Systemic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized control trials was conducted. The PICOS (Population, Interventions, Comparison, Outcomes, and Study) approach was used to look for relevant studies. Searches were conducted at major electronic databases like Medline via PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, SCOPUS, ScienceDirect, Cochrane library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov to find relevant articles from the inception to April 19, 2023. Fourteen randomized control trials involving 2194 patients were among these studies that met the eligibility criteria. Pooled SFR was Mini-PNCL 98% (95% CI 96-99%), Ultara-PCNL 96% (95% CI 93-98%), RIRS 90% (95% CI 88-92%), PCNL 88% (95% CI 85-92%), Micro-PCNL 77% (61-88%) and SWL 69% (95% CI 65-74%). Mini-PCNL provided a statistically significant higher SFR compared to RIRS (RR = 2.43 91.52; 3.89)), Micro-PCNL (RR = 3.19 (1.09; 9.38)), and SWL (RR = 6.17 (3.65; 10.44)), but there was no statistical significance with standard PCNL (RR = 1.06 (0.52; 2.16)) and Ultra-PCNL (RR = 1.37 (0.75; 2.51)) for management of medium-sized lower pole renal stone. The order of SUCRA values for complication rate was as follows: PCNL(90%), Micro-PCNL(70%), Mini-PCNL(50%), Ultra-PCNL(50%), RIRS(40%), and SWL(10%). The current pooled evidence from fourteen randomized control trials revealed that Mini-PCNL, Ultra-PCNL, and standard PCNL are likely the best treatments for medium-sized lower poles when SFR over a short period of minimal session is a priority. These treatment options have a higher rate of complications, longer hospital stays, and acceptable operations time. RIRS and SWL treatment have acceptable efficacy stone-free rate with low complication rate, short hospital stays, and operation time. These treatment option would be the best fit for solitary kidney, coagulopathy, and comorbidity.

Quality of life of patients treated for kidney stones 10-20mm in diameter in terms of the type of operation performed: A qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Urolithiasis is a common chronic disease whose effect on patients' quality of life (QOL) is considerable but depends on the treatment received, differing between types of surgery. Intrarenal stones can be treated with different techniques: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), flexible ureteroscopy (fURS), and mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL), with proportional success and complication rates. The aim of this study was to qualitatively explore the impact of the different techniques on patients' QOL and understand their experiences of treatment choices.

METHODS

Patients treated for medium-sized kidney stones (10-20mm in diameter) were interviewed in a semi-structured manner. The interview data were transcribed and analyzed by theme according to consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) guidelines.

RESULTS

Data saturation was achieved after interviewing 15 patients. The mean interview time was 34min (standard deviation (SD), 6.8min). The mean patient age was 54 years (SD, 9.5 years). Eight patients underwent ESWL, 10 were treated with fURS, and 8 underwent mini-PCNL. Twenty-seven subthemes were coded and regrouped into eight major themes, namely: no sense of choice in the decision-making process for eleven patients; extremely negative experiences of double-J stents for fourteen patients; concern about the risk of recurrence or treatment failure for thirteen patients; complicated hygiene and dietary recommendations for nine patients; technique-dependent postoperative outcomes; relatively well-tolerated operations for thirteen patients; a poor experience of sick leave, often because of a double-J stent; different views regarding future operations. In fact, a third of patients would choose the most effective treatment, a third would choose the simplest procedure and the last third would trust their urologist. Patients' experiences of these operations are variable.

CONCLUSION

Urologists must support their patients by presenting the different treatment options with clear, appropriate, and unbiased information. This should ensure patients take part in treatment decisions as part of a personalized treatment plan.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3

Best Practice in Interventional Management of Urolithiasis: An Update from the European Association of Urology Guidelines Panel for Urolithiasis 2022

PURPOSE

The European Association of Urology (EAU) has updated its guidelines on clinical best practice in urolithiasis for 2021. We therefore aimed to present a summary of best clinical practice in surgical intervention for patients with upper tract urolithiasis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The panel performed a comprehensive literature review of novel data up to May 2021. The guidelines were updated and a strength rating was given for each recommendation, graded using the modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations methodology.

RESULTS

The choice of surgical intervention depends on stone characteristics, patient anatomy, comorbidities, and choice. For shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), the optimal shock frequency is 1.0-1.5 Hz. For ureteroscopy (URS), a postoperative stent is not needed in uncomplicated cases. Flexible URS is an alternative if percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or SWL is contraindicated, even for stones >2 cm. For PCNL, prone and supine approaches are equally safe. For uncomplicated PCNL cases, a nephrostomy tube after PCNL is not necessary. Radiation exposure for endourological procedures should follow the as low as reasonably achievable principles.

CONCLUSIONS

This is a summary of the EAU urolithiasis guidelines on best clinical practice in interventional management of urolithiasis. The full guideline is available at https://uroweb.org/guidelines/urolithiasis.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The European Association of Urology has produced guidelines on the best management of kidney stones, which are summarised in this paper. Kidney stone disease is a common condition; computed tomography (CT) is increasingly used to diagnose it. The guidelines aim to decrease radiation exposure to patients by minimising the use of x-rays and CT scans. We detail specific advice around the common operations for kidney stones.

Comparison of postoperative outcomes of mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis

Our study was aimed to evaluate the postoperative outcomes of Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (Mini-PCNL) and Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (Standard-PCNL) to determine the optimum option for patients with renal calculi. For publications published between January 2010 and April 2021, a comprehensive search of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases was done. The literatures were chosen based on the criteria for inclusion and exclusion. After the data were retrieved and the quality was assessed, the meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager Software (RevMan 5.4.1, Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). We selected 20 trials with a total of 4953 people out of 322 studies. There were 2567 patients treated with Mini-PCNL and 2386 patients treated with Standard-PCNL. Meta-analysis results showed no difference in stone-free rates (SFR, P = 0.93), fever (P = 0.83), and postoperative pain (VAS score) (P = 0.21) between Mini-PCNL and Standard-PCNL. Patients in the Mini-PCNL group experienced shorter hospital stay (P < 0.0001), less hemoglobin drop (P < 0.00001), less blood transfusion (P < 0.00001), higher postoperative tubeless (P = 0.0002), and fewer complications including bleeding (P = 0.01), perforation (P = 0.03), and leakage (P = 0.01). Compared with Standard-PCNL, operative time was longer in the Mini-PCNL group (P = 0.0005). Mini-PCNL had a shorter hospital stay, less hemoglobin drop, less blood transfusion, greater postoperative tubeless, fewer complications, and a longer operational time when compared to Standard-PCNL. SFR, fever, and postoperative pain were similar in both of them. Mini-PCNL may be a superior option for patients with proper size renal calculi.

Mini Versus Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for the Management of Renal Stone Disease: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

CONTEXT

Mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPNL) involves the creation of a smaller access tract compared with standard PNL (sPNL). Smaller tract sizes could lead to decreased blood loss, pain, and need for blood transfusion. Previous studies on this topic have reported variable findings and were of poor quality.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety and efficacy of mPNL with those of sPNL for the management of patients with renal stone disease by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Systematic literature search was performed to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the review. The primary outcomes for the study were stone-free rate (SFR) and blood transfusion rate. The secondary outcomes were complication rates, fever, fall in hemoglobin, operative time, length of stay (LOS), need for auxiliary procedure, and visual analog scale (VAS) score at 24 h. We followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and the study protocol was registered with PROSPERO in priori (CRD42021252444).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

In this review, 16 RCTs with 3961 patients were included. SFR was comparable between the two groups (risk ratio [RR] 1.01 [0.99, 1.04], p = 0.30), whereas the need for transfusion was lower with mPNL (RR 0.54 [0.37, 0.78], p = 0.001). Fall in hemoglobin (mean difference [MD] -0.67 [-0.93, -0.41], p = 0.000) and LOS (MD -0.59 [-0.81, -0.37], p = 0.000) were shorter with mPNL. Operative time was significantly shorter with sPNL (MD 8.28 [3.96, 12.59], p = 0.000). Complications were lower with mPNL (RR 0.89 [0.79, 0.97], p = 0.01). The need for auxiliary procedures (RR 0.77 [0.58, 1.03], p = 0.08) and VAS at 24 h (MD -0.79 [-1.63, 0.05], p = 0.06) were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Mini PNL has similar efficacy to sPNL in terms of SFRs. However, mPNL has a superior safety profile with fewer overall complications and a reduced need for blood transfusion.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis comparing mini and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) for the management of patients with renal stone disease. We showed that mini and standard PNL are associated with similar stone-free rates. Overall complications and the need for blood transfusion were lower with mini PNL.

A prospective, single-centered, cohort study comparing the treatment of renal stones by following PCNL types: Standard, tubeless & totally tubeless

Introduction

Renal stones are a frequent cause of morbidity globally. The number of lumbotomies performed for benign lithiasis has been greatly decreased with the usage of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Further development is aimed at reducing tract size, leading to numerous advanced minimally invasive PCNL procedures like mini-PERC, ultra-mini-PERC, and micro-PERC. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether tubeless or totally tubeless PCNL is the safest and most efficient, less morbid management technique for renal stones compared to the standard PCNL with a nephrostomy tube.

Methodology

This is a comparative, prospective, single-centered, cohort study that took place between August 2015 and January 2018 in the Urology department of Benazir Bhutto Hospital in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. 218 patients having single/multiple stones of variable sizes were enrolled in the study. Participants were stratified into three groups; Group A: Standard PCNL treatment; Group B: Tubeless PCNL treatment; Group C Totally Tubeless treatment. Mean operation time (±SD) and stone-free rates were our primary outcomes. The rate of complications during and post-operative complications were our secondary outcomes.

Results

A total of 181 patients were included in our study. A decreasing trend can be seen in mean operation time as we move from Group A to Group C (p = 0.000). The rate of problems during operation in each group was highest (45.8%) in Group A, much lesser problems in Group C (13.3%), and least problems in Group B (8.1%) (p = 0.000). The postoperative complication rate was again the highest in Group A (30.5%), low in Group C (8.3%), and extremely low in Group B (1.6%)

Conclusion

Tubeless PCNL proved to be the safest and most effective when compared to standard and totally tubeless PCNL procedures. It also showed the highest stone-free rates and least ‘unsatisfactory’ results amongst all the groups. Conclusively, it should be performed in routine preferably.

•

In terms of safety and efficacy, tubeless PCNL outperformed both regular and completely tubeless PCNL.

•

The Tubeless PCNL is much superior than other techniques of PCNL.

•

Aftercare and difficulties during surgery are virtually nonexistent with tubeless PCNL.

•

Stone-free rates were also the highest and the least “unsatisfactory” across all groups. Finally, it's best if it's done on a regular basis.

Comparison between standard, mini and ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy for single renal stones: a prospective study

PURPOSE

Based on the current trend of miniaturization of instruments used in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), it is necessary to compare different PCNL modalities regarding their access sheath size used. Thus, the safety and efficacy among standard, mini and ultra-mini PCNL (s-PCNL, m-PCNL, um-PCNL) were compared.

METHODS

We performed a prospective, non-randomized trial between January 2018 and July 2020. Patients with stones classified as Guy's stone score grade I were included. The set-up for s-PCNL and m-PCNL included a 30 Fr and 22 Fr percutaneous tract, respectively. In both set-ups, an ultrasonic/ballistic lithotripter was utilized. In the case of um-PCNL, a 12 Fr percutaneous tract was established. A high-power laser was used for lithotripsy. Hemoglobin drop, complication rate, length of hospital stay (LOS), stone-free rate (SFR) and operation time were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 84 patients, 28 patients per method, were evaluated. Hemoglobin drop was higher in the s-PCNL group when compared to m-PCNL (p = 0.008) and um-PCNL groups (p < 0.001), while um-PCNL group had the slightest hemoglobin drop. LOS was similar between s-PCNL group and m-PCNL group, but um-PCNL group required shorter hospital stay than the other two modalities (p < 0.001). The complication and transfusion rates as well as SFR did not differ between groups. Operation time in the um-PCNL set-up was longer compared to s-PCNL (p < 0.001) and m-PCNL (p = 0.011), whereas s-PCNL and m-PCNL did not differ significantly.

CONCLUSION

m-PCNL showed less hemoglobin drop, but similar operation time and SFR when compared to s-PCNL. um-PCNL showed even less hemoglobin drop, but the operation time was longer compared to the two other modalities.

Infectious complications of endourological treatment of kidney stones: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

Endourological treatment is associated with a risk of postoperative febrile urinary tract infections and sepsis. The aim of this study was to review the reported rate of infectious complications in relation to the type and modality of the endourologic procedure.

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Two electronic databases (PubMed and EMBASE) were searched. Out of 243 articles retrieved we included 49 studies after full-text evaluation.

RESULTS

Random-effects meta-analysis demonstrated that retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) were associated with not significantly different odds of getting fever (OR = 1.54, 95% CI: 0.99 to 2.39; p = 0.06) or sepsis (OR = 1.52, 95% CI: 0.37 to 6.20, p = 0.56). The odds of getting fever were not significantly different for mini PCNL compared to standard PCNL (OR = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.85 to 1.44; p = 0.45) and for tubeless PCNL compared to standard PCNL (OR = 1.34 95% CI: 0.61 to 2.91, p = 0.47). However, the odds for fever after PCNL with suctioning sheath were lower than the corresponding odds for standard PCNL (OR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.20 to 0.70, p = 0.002). The odds of getting fever after PCNL with perioperative prophylaxis were not different from the corresponding odds after PCNL with perioperative prophylaxis plus a short oral antibiotic course (before or after the procedure) (OR = 1.31, 95% CI: 0.71 to 2.39, p = 0.38).

CONCLUSIONS

The type of endourological procedure does not appear to be decisive in the onset of infectious complications, although the prevention of high intrarenal pressure during the procedure could be crucial in defining the risk of infectious complications.   on behalf of U-merge Ltd. (Urology for emerging countries), London-Athens-Dubai.

Flank free modified supine versus prone ultra mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in treatment of medium sized renal pelvic stone a randomized clinical trial

INTRODUCTION & OBJECTIVES

percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) is the standard treatment of renal stone more than 2 cm. ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy had emerged in the last decade as a new technique in treating renal stones less than 2 cm. in this study we compare between outcomes of (UMP) in modified flank free supine (FFSP), and prone position.

MATERIALS & METHODS

A prospective randomized study was conducted between January 2016 and April 2020, including 122 patients, divided into two matched groups. Group A included 61 patients who underwent UMP in FFSP, and group B included 61 patients who underwent UMP in a prone position. All patients had a single renal pelvic stone 1-2 cm. Patients with a single kidney, renal anomalies, BMI≥40, history of ipsilateral renal surgery, and age less than 18 years were excluded. In both groups, the dilatation was done up to 13 f; a holmium laser was used through a 9f ureteroscope for fragmentation. Nephrostomy tube and ureteric stent were used only when indicated.

RESULTS

122 patients who divided into two groups. The mean age was 40.09±13.63 and 39.67±13.80 years in both groups, respectively. The operative time was 63.64±9.22 and 78.48±9.55 minutes in groups A &B, respectively (P=0.0001). The fluoroscopy time was 3.47±0.56 and 4.45±0.39 minutes in groups A &B, respectively (P=0.0001).no significant difference between both groups regarding operative and post-operative complications. Shift to miniPNL was needed in one patient in group A and four patients in group B due to impaired vision. The hospital stay was 25.36±4.23 and 26.13±4.76 hours in both groups, respectively. The initial stone-free rate was 95.1% and 91.8% in both groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in modified supine position shows comparable results to the prone position regarding stone-free rate, hospital stay, and perioperative complication, with significantly shorter operative and fluoroscopy time.

Percutaneous laser nephrolithotripsy: is it here to stay? Results of a systematic review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

PCNL (percutaneous nephrolithotomy) and its miniaturized variants are being widely employed in stone surgery, owing to their high-stone-free rates (SFRs) and efficacy for large (>20 mm) stones. With advances in laser technology, it has been readily utilized in PCNL, with the potential for lower complication rates at similar SFR. We aimed to perform a systematic literature review with a focus on recent prospective clinical data that compares laser PCNL to either nonlaser PCNL, different PCNL sizes or other current standards of care such as shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) or flexible ureteroscopy (FURS).

RECENT FINDINGS

Of the 294 studies initially identified through database searching, nine papers published between 2019 and 2021 were included which compared laser PCNL (Standard PCNL in three, mini-PCNL in four, ultra-mini PCNL in one, micro-PCNL in one study) to other nonlaser lithotripsy, ESWL, FURS, and different PCNL sizes. Complications for laser PCNL ranged from bleeding (4.4%), perirenal haematoma (1.1%), fever (4.6%), ureteric/renal pelvic injury (2.3%), haematuria (2.7%), and infection (2.6%). The mean SFR for laser PCNL was 91.5% at 3 months.

SUMMARY

Percutaneous laser nephrolithotripsy is well tolerated and effective, with high-SFRs at 3 months and relatively low intraoperative and postoperative complication rates. Further research is required to assess the role of intraoperative techniques and suction to improve outcomes further.

Ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in flank-free modified supine position versus prone position in treatment of pediatric renal pelvic and lower calyceal stones

OBJECTIVES

To report the safety and efficacy of ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMPCNL) in flank free modified supine (FFMS) and prone positions in management of pediatric renal calculi.

PATIENTS & METHODS

This prospective randomized study included 55 pediatric patients with symptomatic renal stones and suitable for ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy. They were randomized into two groups. Group A included 28 patients who were treated by UMPCNL in FFMS position (with a pad below the ipsilateral shoulder and buttocks, putting ipsilateral upper limb over the chest, and crossing the extended ipsilateral lower limb over the flexed contralateral one) and Group B included 27 patients treated by UMPCNL in the prone position. In both groups dilatation was done to 13 French sheath allowing the introduction of 6/7.5 French semi-rigid ureteroscope and fragmentation of stones by Ho:YAG laser with a 550-μm fiber laser lithotripter.

RESULTS

The operation time in FFMS position UMPCNL group was significantly shorter than prone position UMPCNL group (84.3±9.87 vs. 99.3±8.75) minutes with p=0.022. There was no significant difference between both groups in terms of stone free rate (89.3% vs. 88.9%), overall complication rate (including transient fever) (21.4% vs. 18.5%), post-operative pain (VAS score) (3.4±0.8 vs. 3.3±0.9), or hospital stay (3.53±0.8 vs. 4.1±1.1) days.

CONCLUSION

Both ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in FFMs and prone positions are feasible, safe and effective in treatment of pediatric renal stones with relatively shorter operative time in FFMS position.

Recent advances in percutaneous lithotripsy techniques

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To describe and critically discuss the most recent evidence regarding the percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) techniques.

RECENT FINDINGS

Three-dimensional printing and virtual reality are promising tools to improve surgeon experience and operative performance. Totally ultrasound-guided PCNL is feasible and can reduce the radiological risk. Growing evidence highlights the safety and advantages of the use of miniaturized instrumentations, although some related limitations place the mini PCNL (mPCNL) in direct challenge with the retrograde intrarenal surgery. LithoClast Trilogy and ClearPetra system can improve the stone clearance. Thulium laser is a new source of energy with growing expectations and promising in-vitro results.

SUMMARY

Significant advances have recently been recorded in PCNL techniques. Thulium fiber laser, LithoClast Trilogy, new suction devices, and the development of novel technologies for teaching and planning procedures may overcome mPCNL drawbacks. Further studies are needed to confirm the promising preliminary results available on the topic.