A comparison among RIRS and MiniPerc for renal stones between 10 and 20 mm using thulium fiber laser (Fiber Dust): a randomized controlled trial.
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy
RIRS
Renal stone
Stone-free rate
Thulium fiber laser
Journal
World journal of urology
ISSN: 1433-8726
Titre abrégé: World J Urol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8307716
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2022
Oct 2022
Historique:
received:
21
05
2022
accepted:
11
08
2022
pubmed:
28
8
2022
medline:
28
9
2022
entrez:
27
8
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
We performed a prospective randomized comparison among Retrograde IntraRenal Surgery (RIRS) and MiniPerc (MP) for stones between 10 and 20 mm to evaluate outcomes with the same laser device: Fiber Dust. Patients with a single renal stone between 10 and 20 mm were randomized to RIRS (Group A) versus MP (Group B). Exclusion criteria were age < 18 or > 75, presence of acute infection, coagulation impairments, cardiovascular or pulmonary comorbidities. In both groups, the Fiber Dust laser was used. A CT scan after 3 months was performed. A negative CT scan or asymptomatic patients with stone fragments < 3 mm and a negative urinary culture were the criteria to assess the stone-free status. A statistical analysis was carried out to assess success, complication and retreatment rates and need for auxiliary treatments. Between January 2021 and January 2022, 186 patients were enrolled (90 in Group A and 96 in Group B). Mean stone size was 15.8 mm and 14.9 mm in Group A and B, respectively (p = 0.23). The overall stone-free rate (SFR) was 73.3% for Group A and 84.4% for Group B. A higher SFR was reached for upper calyceal stones in Group A (90.4%) lower calyceal stones in Group B (91.6%). Retreatment rate (p = 0.31) and auxiliary procedure rate (p = 0.18) were comparable. Complication rate was 5.5% and 5.2% for Groups A and B, respectively. RIRS and MP are both effective to obtain a postoperative SFR with Fiber Dust. According to the stone position one treatment is superior to the other one.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36029330
doi: 10.1007/s00345-022-04133-w
pii: 10.1007/s00345-022-04133-w
doi:
Substances chimiques
Dust
0
Thulium
8RKC5ATI4P
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2555-2560Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Skolarikos A, Neisius A, Petrik A, et al. (2022) EAU guidelines on urolithiasis. Edn. presented at the EAU Annual Congress Amsterdam, 2022. ISBN 978-94-92671-16-5.
de la Rosette J, Denstedt J, Geavlete P et al (2014) The clinical research office of the endourological society ureteroscopy global study: indications, complications, and outcomes in 11,885 patients. J Endourol 28:131–139. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2013.0436
doi: 10.1089/end.2013.0436
pubmed: 24147820
Karaolides T, Bach C, Kachrilas S et al (2013) Improving the durability of digital flexible ureteroscopes. Urology 81:717–722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2013.01.016
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2013.01.016
pubmed: 23465156
Mishra S, Sharma R, Garg C et al (2011) Prospective comparative study of miniperc and standard PNL for treatment of 1 to 2 cm size renal stone. BJU Int 108:896–899. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09936.x (discussion 899-900)
doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09936.x
pubmed: 21477212
Coskun A, Eryildirim B, Sarica K et al (2021) Comparison of mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (Mini PCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the minimal invasive management of lower caliceal stones. Urol J 18:485–490. https://doi.org/10.22037/uj.v18i07.6443
doi: 10.22037/uj.v18i07.6443
pubmed: 33638144
Keller EX, Coninck DEV, Proietti S et al (2021) Prone versus supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of current literature. Minerva Urol Nephrol 73:50–58. https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6051.20.03960-0
doi: 10.23736/S2724-6051.20.03960-0
pubmed: 33016031
Corrales M, Traxer O (2022) Retrograde intrarenal surgery: laser showdown (Ho:YAG vs thulium fiber laser). Curr Opin Urol 32:179–184. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOU.0000000000000971
doi: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000000971
pubmed: 35013078
Kronenberg P, Traxer O (2019) The laser of the future: reality and expectations about the new thulium fiber laser-a systematic review. Transl Androl Urol 8:S398–S417. https://doi.org/10.21037/tau.2019.08.01
doi: 10.21037/tau.2019.08.01
pubmed: 31656746
pmcid: 6790412
Taratkin M, Azilgareeva C, Chinenov D et al (2021) Retrograde intrarenal surgery versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy in larger kidney stones. Could SuperPulsed thulium-fiber laser change the game? Cent European J Urol 74:229–234. https://doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2021.0133
doi: 10.5173/ceju.2021.0133
pubmed: 34336243
pmcid: 8318030
Bozzini G, Verze P, Arcaniolo D et al (2017) A prospective randomized comparison among SWL, PCNL and RIRS for lower calyceal stones less than 2 cm: a multicenter experience : a better understanding on the treatment options for lower pole stones. World J Urol 35:1967–1975. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2084-7
doi: 10.1007/s00345-017-2084-7
pubmed: 28875295
Kallidonis P, Adamou C, Ntasiotis P et al (2021) The best treatment approach for lower calyceal stones ≤20 mm in maximal diameter: mini percutaneous nephrolithotripsy, retrograde intrarenal surgery or shock wave lithotripsy. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature conducted by the European section of uro-technology and young academic urologists. Minerva Urol Nephrol 73:711–723. https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6051.21.04388-3
doi: 10.23736/S2724-6051.21.04388-3
pubmed: 34156200
Kronenberg P, Hameed BZ, Somani B (2021) Outcomes of thulium fibre laser for treatment of urinary tract stones: results of a systematic review. Curr Opin Urol 31:80–86. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOU.0000000000000853
doi: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000000853
pubmed: 33470684
pmcid: 7879830
Schembri M, Sahu J, Aboumarzouk O et al (2020) Thulium fiber laser: the new kid on the block. Turk J Urol 46:S1–S10. https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2020.20093
doi: 10.5152/tud.2020.20093
pubmed: 32479257
pmcid: 7731960
Rice P, Somani BK (2021) A systematic review of thulium fiber laser: applications and advantages of laser technology in the field of urology. Res Rep Urol 13:519–527. https://doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S233979
doi: 10.2147/RRU.S233979
pubmed: 34327179
pmcid: 8314925