Department of Urology, Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, and Guangdong Key Laboratory of Urology, Guangzhou, China.
Department of Urology, Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, and Guangdong Key Laboratory of Urology, Guangzhou, China.
Eur Urol. 2021 Jan;79(1):114-121. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.026. Epub 2020 Sep 29.
High quality of evidence comparing mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPNL) with standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (sPNL) for the treatment of larger-sized renal stones is lacking.
To compare the efficacy and safety of mPNL and sPNL for the treatment of 20-40mm renal stones.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A parallel, open-label, and noninferior randomized controlled trial was performed at 20 Chinese centers (2016-2019). The inclusion criteria were patients 18-70 yr old, with normal renal function, and 20-40mm renal stones.
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy PNL was performed using either 18 F or 24 F percutaneous nephrostomy tracts.
The primary outcome was the one-session stone-free rate (SFR). The secondary outcomes included operating time, visual analog pain scale (VAS) score, blood loss, complications as per the Clavien-Dindo grading system, and length of hospitalization.
The 1980 intention-to-treat patients were randomized. The mPNL group achieved a noninferior one-session SFR to the sPNL group by the one-side noninferiority test (0.5% [difference], p < 0.001). The transfusion and embolization rates were comparable; however, the sPNL group had a higher hemoglobin drop (5.2 g/l, p < 0.001). The sPNL yielded shorter operating time (-2.2 min, p = 0.008) but a higher VAS score (0.8, p < 0.001). Patients in the sPNL group also had longer hospitalization (0.6 d, p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in fever or urosepsis occurrences. The study's main limitation was that only 18F or 24F tract sizes were used.
Mini mPNL achieves noninferior SFR outcomes to sPNL, but with reduced bleeding, less postoperative pain, and shorter hospitalization.
We evaluated the surgical outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy using two different sizes of nephrostomy tracts in a large population. We found that the smaller tract might be a sensible alternative for patients with 20-40mm renal stones.
高质量的证据表明,微创经皮肾镜碎石术(mPNL)与标准经皮肾镜碎石术(sPNL)治疗较大肾结石的疗效相当,但缺乏比较二者的研究。
比较 mPNL 与 sPNL 治疗 20-40mm 肾结石的疗效和安全性。
设计、地点和参与者:这是一项在中国 20 家中心进行的平行、开放标签、非劣效性随机对照试验(2016-2019 年)。纳入标准为年龄 18-70 岁、肾功能正常、结石大小为 20-40mm 的患者。
经皮肾镜碎石术采用 18F 或 24F 经皮肾造瘘管进行。
主要结局为单次清石率(SFR)。次要结局包括手术时间、视觉模拟疼痛评分(VAS)、出血量、Clavien-Dindo 分级系统的并发症以及住院时间。
1980 名意向治疗患者被随机分组。通过单侧非劣效性检验,mPNL 组的单次 SFR 不劣于 sPNL 组(差异 0.5%,p<0.001)。两组的输血和栓塞率相当,但 sPNL 组的血红蛋白下降更明显(5.2g/L,p<0.001)。sPNL 的手术时间更短(-2.2min,p=0.008),但 VAS 评分更高(0.8,p<0.001)。sPNL 组的住院时间也更长(0.6d,p<0.001)。两组发热或尿脓毒症的发生率无统计学差异。该研究的主要局限性在于仅使用了 18F 或 24F 通道大小。
微创 mPNL 的 SFR 结果不劣于 sPNL,但出血更少、术后疼痛更轻、住院时间更短。
我们评估了在较大人群中使用两种不同大小经皮肾造瘘管进行经皮肾镜碎石术的手术结果。我们发现,对于 20-40mm 肾结石患者,较小的通道可能是一种明智的选择。