Clinical study of UMP and RIRS in 1.0-2.0 cm diameter renal/upper ureteral calculi.
Efficacy
Kidney stones
Retrograde intrarenal surgery
Ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy
Upper ureteral calculi
Journal
World journal of urology
ISSN: 1433-8726
Titre abrégé: World J Urol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8307716
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 Jun 2024
13 Jun 2024
Historique:
received:
17
09
2023
accepted:
23
05
2024
medline:
13
6
2024
pubmed:
13
6
2024
entrez:
13
6
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of Ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMP) and Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for renal/upper ureteral calculi in 1.0-2.0 cm diameter. From October 2017 to October 2022, the surgical treatment of patients with renal/upper ureteral calculi in 1.0-2.0 cm diameter who were admitted to our hospital was retrospectively analyzed. They were divided into two groups, the UMP group (sixty-two cases) and the RIRS group (one hundred and nine cases), according to the different surgical methods. Baseline data includes general information, stone size, location, CT value, hydronephrosis, creatinine level, etc. RESULTS: Intraoperative blood loss was 33.6 ± 8.5 ml in the UMP group was significantly more than 4.3 ± 0.7 ml in the RIRS group (P < 0.05). Intraoperative renal pelvis pressure of UMP group 10.5 ± 1.3 mmHg was significantly lower than RIRS group 23.6 ± 5.6 mmHg (P < 0.05). The incidence of postoperative infection was higher in the RIRS group (thirteen cases [11.93%]), and one case ([1.61%]) in the UMP group (P < 0.05). Routine CT scans on the second day and two months after surgery showed that the stone clearance rates in the UMP group were 87.1% and 93.5%, respectively, higher than those in the RIRS group (69.7% and 79.8%, respectively; P < 0.05). UMP has the advantage of a higher stone-free rate but a higher risk of injury and bleeding. The advantages of RIRS include less trauma, less bleeding, and faster recovery, but lower stone-free rates and a higher risk of infection.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of Ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMP) and Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for renal/upper ureteral calculi in 1.0-2.0 cm diameter.
METHODS
METHODS
From October 2017 to October 2022, the surgical treatment of patients with renal/upper ureteral calculi in 1.0-2.0 cm diameter who were admitted to our hospital was retrospectively analyzed. They were divided into two groups, the UMP group (sixty-two cases) and the RIRS group (one hundred and nine cases), according to the different surgical methods. Baseline data includes general information, stone size, location, CT value, hydronephrosis, creatinine level, etc. RESULTS: Intraoperative blood loss was 33.6 ± 8.5 ml in the UMP group was significantly more than 4.3 ± 0.7 ml in the RIRS group (P < 0.05). Intraoperative renal pelvis pressure of UMP group 10.5 ± 1.3 mmHg was significantly lower than RIRS group 23.6 ± 5.6 mmHg (P < 0.05). The incidence of postoperative infection was higher in the RIRS group (thirteen cases [11.93%]), and one case ([1.61%]) in the UMP group (P < 0.05). Routine CT scans on the second day and two months after surgery showed that the stone clearance rates in the UMP group were 87.1% and 93.5%, respectively, higher than those in the RIRS group (69.7% and 79.8%, respectively; P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
UMP has the advantage of a higher stone-free rate but a higher risk of injury and bleeding. The advantages of RIRS include less trauma, less bleeding, and faster recovery, but lower stone-free rates and a higher risk of infection.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38869843
doi: 10.1007/s00345-024-05076-0
pii: 10.1007/s00345-024-05076-0
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Comparative Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
376Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Sorokin I, Mamoulakis C, Miyazawa K, Rodgers A, Talati J, Lotan Y (2017) Epidemiology of stone disease across the world. World J Urol 35(9):1301–1320
doi: 10.1007/s00345-017-2008-6
pubmed: 28213860
Portis AJ, Bultitude MF: Re: Zhangqun Ye, Zeng G, Yang H et al (2018) Efficacy and Safety of Tamsulosin in Medical Expulsive Therapy for Distal Ureteral Stones with Renal Colic: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial. Eur Urol. ;73:385 – 91. European urology 2018, 74(2):e37-e39
Lee EH, Kim SH, Shin JH, Park SB, Chi BH, Hwang JH (2019) Effects on renal outcome of concomitant acute pyelonephritis, acute kidney injury and obstruction duration in obstructive uropathy by urolithiasis: a retrospective cohort study. BMJ open 9(11):e030438
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030438
pubmed: 31685503
pmcid: 6858199
Li J, Xun Y, Li C, Han Y, Shen Y, Hu X, Hu D, Liu Z, Wang S, Li Z (2020) Estimation of renal function using Unenhanced Computed Tomography in Upper urinary Tract stones patients. Front Med 7:309
doi: 10.3389/fmed.2020.00309
Gadelkareem RA, Moeen AM, Khalil M, Reda A, Farouk M, Abdelkawi IF, Makboul R, Mohammed N, Hameed DA (2020) Experience of a tertiary-level Urology Center in clinical urological events of rare and very rare incidence. V. Urological tumors: 1. Adrenal myelolipoma. Curr Urol 14(2):85–91
doi: 10.1159/000499254
pubmed: 32774233
pmcid: 7390982
Moe OW (2006) Kidney stones: pathophysiology and medical management. Lancet (London England) 367(9507):333–344
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68071-9
pubmed: 16443041
Rodríguez D, Sacco DE (2015) Minimally invasive surgical treatment for kidney stone disease. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis 22(4):266–272
doi: 10.1053/j.ackd.2015.03.005
pubmed: 26088070
Xia X, Xie L (2009) Clinical analysis and treatment of the complications of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy
Chengguo G, Fengshuo J, Jun J (2011) Treatment of septic shock during and after percutaneous nephrolithotomy or ureteroscopic lithotripsy: report of 15 cases. Chin J Minim Invasive Surg
Hein S, Miernik A, Wilhelm K, Adams F, Schlager D, Herrmann T, Rassweiler J, Schoenthaler M (2016) Clinical significance of residual fragments in 2015: impact, detection, and how to avoid them. World J Urol 34(6):771–778
doi: 10.1007/s00345-015-1713-2
pubmed: 26497824
Marien T, Robles J, Kammann TM, Kadihasanoglu M, Viprakasit DP, Herrell SD, Miller NL (2017) Characterization of Urolithiasis in patients following lower urinary Tract Reconstruction with intestinal segments. J Endourol 31(3):217–222
doi: 10.1089/end.2016.0297
pubmed: 27936931
Eshghi M, Addonizio JC (1987) Same-session endourological removal of upper and impacted lower urinary tract stones with the aid of prone flexible cystoscopy. J Urol 138(1):127–129
doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)43018-7
pubmed: 3599194
Zhang Z, Wang X, Chen D, Peng N, Chen J, Wang Q, Yang M, Zhang Y (2020) Minimally invasive management of acute ureteral obstruction and severe infection caused by upper urinary tract calculi. J X-Ray Sci Technol 28(1):125–135
Shi B, Shi F, Xu K, Shi L, Tang H, Wang N, Wu Y, Gu J, Ding J, Huang Y (2019) The prognostic performance of Sepsis-3 and SIRS criteria for patients with urolithiasis-associated sepsis transferred to ICU following surgical interventions. Experimental Therapeutic Med 18(5):4165–4172
Pandey S, Sharma D, Sankhwar S, Singh M, Garg G, Aggarwal A, Sharma A, Agarwal S (2018) Are there any predictive risk factors for failure of ureteric stent in patients with obstructive urolithiasis with sepsis? Invest Clin Urol 59(6):371–375
doi: 10.4111/icu.2018.59.6.371
Cindolo L, Berardinelli F, Castellan P, Castellucci R, Pellegrini F, Schips L (2017) A fatal mycotic sepsis after retrograde intrarenal surgery: a case report and literature review. Urologia 84(2):106–108
doi: 10.5301/uro.5000173
pubmed: 27174535
Fukushima H, Kobayashi M, Kawano K, Morimoto S (2018) Performance of Quick Sequential (Sepsis Related) and sequential (Sepsis Related) Organ failure Assessment to predict mortality in patients with Acute Pyelonephritis Associated with Upper urinary tract Calculi. J Urol 199(6):1526–1533
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.12.052
pubmed: 29291417
Desai J, Solanki R (2013) Ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMP): one more armamentarium. BJU Int 112(7):1046–1049
doi: 10.1111/bju.12193
pubmed: 23841665
Haili L, Zhouda Z, Hongjie L, Urology DO (2018) Flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy for Upper urinary tract calculi in solitary kidney:report of 36 cases. Chin J Minim Invasive Surg
Gadzhiev NK, Obidnyak VM, Gorelov DS, Malkhasyan VA, Akopyan GN, Mazurenko DA, Kharchilava RR, Petrov SB, Martov AG (1999) [Complications after PCNL: diagnosis and management]. Urol (Moscow Russia 2020(5):139–148
Gao J, Hu LB, Chen C, Zhi X, Xu T (2020) [Interventional treatment of hemorrhage after percutaneous nephrolithotomy]. Beijing Da Xue Xue bao Yi xue ban = J Peking Univ Health Sci 52(4):667–671
Demir DO, Doluoglu OG, Yildiz Y, Bozkurt S, Ayyildiz A, Demirbas A (2019) Risk factors for infectious complications in patients undergoing Retrograde Intrarenal surgery. J Coll Physicians Surgeons–Pakistan: JCPSP 29(6):558–562
doi: 10.29271/jcpsp.2019.06.558
Yingsheng C, Daijun Y, Panfeng Z, Zhiyan Z, Urology DO, Hospital GP Experience in diagnosis and treatment of urosepsis following ureteroscopic lithotripsy of upper urinary tract calculi. J Minim Invasive Urol
Lee SH, Choi T, Choi J, Yoo KH (2020) Differences between risk factors for Sepsis and Septic Shock in Obstructive Urolithiasis. J Korean Med Sci 35(43):e359
doi: 10.3346/jkms.2020.35.e359
pubmed: 33169555
pmcid: 7653168
Low RK (1999) Nephroscopy sheath characteristics and intrarenal pelvic pressure: human kidney model. J Endourol 13(3):205–208
doi: 10.1089/end.1999.13.205
pubmed: 10360501
Dede O, Sancaktutar AA, Dağguli M, Utangaç M, Baş O, Penbegul N (2015) Ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in pediatric nephrolithiasis: both low pressure and high efficiency. J Pediatr Urol 11(5):253e251–253e256
doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2015.03.012