Flexible mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intra-renal surgery in the management of renal stones: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors

Ahmed Higazy, M Kandil, Ahmed Elshafei, M Esmat, A M Tawfeek

Published in

World journal of urology. Volume 43. Issue 1. Pages 328. May 26, 2025. Epub May 26, 2025.

Abstract

To assess the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of flexible mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (F-mPCNL) in managing nephrolithiasis compared to retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS).
130 adult patients with renal stones (1.5-3 cm) were randomized to F-mPCNL or RIRS. The stone-free rate (SFR) was our primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were the operative time, fluoroscopy time, DJ stent insertion rate, auxiliary procedure needed, hospital stay, complications rate, total cost, and quality of life for both procedures.
out of 130 patients in our study, 125 were evaluated and completed the follow-up period. Preoperative data was similar in both groups including stone characteristics. F-mPCNL showed a better SFR of 95.1% compared to 77.8% in the RIRS group (p-value˂0.001), this was associated with less need for additional procedures. F-mPCNL was associated with a shorter operation time of 47.60 ± 14.54 min compared to 59.30 ± 20.10 min in the RIRS group (p-value˂0.001). F-mPCNL showed less radiational exposure and less need for DJ stent insertion than RIRS. The overall complication rate was comparable in both groups, postoperative pain, need for extra doses of analgesics, and hospital stay were higher in the F-mPCNL group. In our study, F-mPCNL was shown to be more cost-effective than RIRS.
F-mPCNL showed a superior SFR in treating renal stones compared to RIRS in a single session, with less need for auxiliary procedures, shorter operative time, less radiational exposure, and better quality of life. However, it was associated with slightly more hospital stay and postoperative pain compared to RIRS.

PMID:
40418257
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 26 May 2025.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.