Top

World Journal of Urology

Published in:

01-11-2017 | Original Article

A prospective randomized comparison of micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy (Microperc) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the management of lower pole kidney stones

Authors: Abdulkadir Kandemir, Selcuk Guven, Mehmet Balasar, Mehmet Giray Sonmez, Hakan Taskapu, Recai Gurbuz

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 11/2017

Abstract

Objective

To make a comparison between the safety and efficacy of micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy (microperc) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the management of lower pole kidney stones up to 15 mm.

Patients and methods

60 patients presenting with solitary lower pole kidney stones up to 15 mm were included in the study between March 2013 and December 2015. Patients were randomized into Microperc or RIRS groups with computer-generated numbers.

Results

The mean stone size was 10.6 (5–15) and 11.5 (7–15) mm for Microperc and RIRS groups, respectively (P = 0.213). In the Microperc group, the scopy time was 158.5 s, while in the RIRS group, the scopy time was 26.6 s (P = 0.001). The hospitalization period in the Microperc group was 542 h, while it was 19 h in the RIRS group (P = 0.001). No statistical differences were observed during the operating time, pre-operative–post-operative hemoglobin (Hb), serum creatinine, and estimated glomerular filtration speed (e-GFR) values and stone-free rates. No intraoperative complications were observed in either of the groups, while post-operative complications were observed in six patients in Microperc Group and five patients belonging to the RIRS Group (P = 0.922).

Conclusions

Both Microperc and RIRS are safe and effective alternatives, and have similar stone clearance and complication rates for the management of lower pole kidney stones up to 15 mm in diameter. However, prolonged hospital stay and scopy times are the main disadvantages of Microperc and further research is needed to evaluate the renal tubular damages caused by both of these methods.

Menon M, Resnick MI (2007) Urinary lithiasis: etiology, epidemiology and pathogenesis. In: Wein AJ (ed) Campell’s Urology vol. 2, 2nd edn. Sounders, Philadelphia

Türk C, Knoll T, Petrik A, Sarica K, Seitz C, Straub M. EAU Guidelines on Urolithiasis. Uroweb 2012. Available at: http://www.uroweb.org/gls/pdf/20_Urolithiasis_LR%20March%2013%202012.pdf. Accessed 14 November 2012

Srisubat A, Potisat S, Lojanapiwat B, Setthawong V, Laopaiboon M (2009) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4:CD007044

Koo V, Young M, Thompson T, Duggan B (2011) Cost-effectiveness and efficiency of shockwave lithotripsy vs flexible ureteroscopic holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser lithotripsy in the treatment of lower pole renal calculi. BJU Int 108:1913–1916CrossRefPubMed

Bryniarski P, Paradysz A, Zyczkowski M, Kupilas A, Nowakowski K, Bogacki R (2012) Randomized controlled study to analyze the safety and efficacy of percutaneous nephrolithotripsy and retrograde intrarenal surgery in the management of renal stones more than 2 cm in diameter. J Endourol 26:52–57CrossRefPubMed

Goger E, Guven S, Gurbuz R, Yilmaz K, Kilinc M, Ozturk A (2012) Management of a colon perforation during pediatric percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 26(9):1118–1120. doi:10.1089/end.2011.0433 CrossRefPubMed

Guven S, Istanbulluoglu O, Gul U, Ozturk A, Celik H, Aygün C, Ozdemir U, Ozturk B, Ozkardes H, Kilinc M (2011) Successful percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children: multicenter study on current status of its use, efficacy and complications using Clavien classification. J Urol 185(4):1419–1424. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2010.11.055 CrossRefPubMed

Helal M, Black T, Lockhart J, Figueroa TE (1997) The Hickman peelaway sheath: alternative for pediatric percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 11:171–172CrossRefPubMed

Bader M, Gratzke C, Schlenker B et al (2010) The “All-seeing needle”- an optical puncture system confirming percutaneous access in PNL. J Urol Suppl 183:e734 (abstract 1890) CrossRef

10.

Kiremit MC, Guven S, Sarica K, Ozturk A, Buldu I, Kafkasli A, Balasar M, Istanbulluoglu O, Horuz R, Cetinel CA, Kandemir A, Albayrak S (2015) Contemporary management of medium-sized (10–20 mm) renal stones: A Retrospective Multicenter Observational Study. J Endourol 29(7):838–843. doi:10.1089/end.2014.0698 CrossRefPubMed

11.

Resorlu B, Unsal A, Ziypak T, Diri A, Atis G, Guven S, Sancaktutar AA, Tepeler A, Bozkurt OF, Oztuna D (2013) Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery, shockwave lithotripsy, and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treatment of medium-sized radiolucent renal stones. World J Urol 31(6):1581–1586. doi:10.1007/s00345-012-0991-1 CrossRefPubMed

12.

Sabnis RB, Ganesamoni R, Doshi A, Ganpule AP, Jagtap J, Desai MR (2013) Micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy (microperc) vs retrograde intrarenal surgery for the management of small renal calculi: a randomized controlled trial. BJU Int 112(3):355–361. doi:10.1111/bju.12164 (PubMed PMID: 23826843) CrossRefPubMed

13.

Armagan A, Karatag T, Buldu I, Tosun M, Basibuyuk I, Istanbulluoglu MO, Tepeler A (2015) Comparison of flexible ureterorenoscopy and micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment for moderately size lower-pole stones. World J Urol 33(11):1827–1831. doi:10.1007/s00345-015-1503-x CrossRefPubMed

14.

Levey AS, Stevens LA, Schmid CH et al (2009) A new equation to estimate glomerular filtration rate. Ann Intern Med 150:604–612CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Donaldson JF, Lardas M, Scrimgeour D et al (2015) Systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical effectiveness of shock wave lithotripsy, retrograde intrarenal surgery, and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for lower-pole renal stones. Eur Urol 67:612–616CrossRefPubMed

16.

De S, Autorino R, Kim FJ et al (2015) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 67:125–137CrossRefPubMed

17.

Desai MR, Sharma R, Mishra S, Sabnis RB, Stief C, Bader M (2011) Single-step percutaneous nephrolithotomy (microperc):the initial clinical report. J Urol 186:140–145CrossRefPubMed

18.

Balasar M, Pişkin MM, Topcu C, Demir LS, Gürbilek M, Kandemir A, Öztürk A (2016) Urinary kidney injury molecule-1 levels in renal stone patients. World J Urol. doi:10.1007/s00345-016-1765-y PubMed

Title: A prospective randomized comparison of micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy (Microperc) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the management of lower pole kidney stones
Authors: Abdulkadir Kandemir
Selcuk Guven
Mehmet Balasar
Mehmet Giray Sonmez
Hakan Taskapu
Recai Gurbuz
Publication date: 01-11-2017
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: World Journal of Urology / Issue 11/2017
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2058-9

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

A prospective randomized comparison of micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy (Microperc) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the management of lower pole kidney stones

Abstract

Objective

Patients and methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Patients and methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 11/2017

Population-based study of grade progression in patients who harboured Gleason 3 + 3

Surgical therapy of prostatitis: a systematic review

Review on diagnosis and management of urolithiasis in pregnancy: an ESUT practical guide for urologists

Outcome from 5-year live surgical demonstrations in urinary stone treatment: are outcomes compromised?

Trends of ‘urolithiasis: interventions, simulation, and laser technology’ over the last 16 years (2000–2015) as published in the literature (PubMed): a systematic review from European section of Uro-technology (ESUT)

Role of lymph node dissection during radical nephroureterectomy for upper urinary tract urothelial cancer: multi-institutional large retrospective study JCOG1110A