Suppr超能文献

微创经皮肾镜取石术与输尿管软镜治疗1-2厘米下极肾结石的随机对照试验

Mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs flexible ureteroscopy for 1-2 cm lower pole renal stones: a randomised controlled trial.

作者信息

Elmansy Hazem, Fathy Moustafa, Hodhod Amr, Alaref Amer, Hadi Ruba Abdul, Abbas Loay, Alaradi Husain, Labib Yasser, Shahrour Walid, Zakaria Ahmed S

机构信息

Urology Department, Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre, Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada.

Urology Department, Menoufia University, Menoufia, Egypt.

出版信息

BJU Int. 2025 Mar;135(3):437-445. doi: 10.1111/bju.16567. Epub 2024 Oct 22.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety and efficacy of flexible ureteroscopy (f-URS) and ambulatory tubeless mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) in the treatment of 1-2 cm lower calyceal renal stones.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent f-URS and mini-PCNL for the treatment of 1-2 cm lower calyceal renal stones between October 2020 and November 2023 were evaluated in a randomised controlled trial. A total of 72 patients were included in the study. All patients underwent a computed tomography renal colic scan preoperatively, on postoperative Day 1 (POD 1), and at 3 months follow-up. We compared perioperative outcomes, including operative time and hospital stay. Additionally, we evaluated follow-up outcomes, such as the stone-free rate (SFR) and complications. All patients were discharged home on the same operative day.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in preoperative baseline data between the two surgical groups. A significantly longer median operative time was reported in the mini-PCNL group (P = 0.04). The median hospital stay was 5 h and 4 h in the mini-PCNL and f-URS groups, respectively (P = 0.14). On POD 1, the SFR, defined as the absence of residual fragments measuring 0 cm, was 50% for mini-PCNL vs 11.1% for f-URS (P < 0.001). When a total cut-off of <0.4 cm was utilised, the SFR was 75% in the mini-PCNL group vs 22.2% in the f-URS cohort (P < 0.001). At 3 months follow-up, the SFR remained favourable for mini-PCNL at 72.2% vs 37.1% for f-URS (P = 0.003), with a cut-off of 0 cm, and it increased to 86.1% for mini-PCNL vs 65.7% for f-URS (P = 0.04) when a total cut-off of <0.4 cm was applied. There was no significant difference in postoperative complications between the two groups. Two patients (5.7%) in the f-URS group required re-treatment. [Correction added on 5 November 2024, after first online publication: Within the Results section, '<4 cm' has been corrected to '<0.4 cm'.] CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory tubeless mini-PCNL and f-URS are effective treatment options for 1-2 cm lower calyceal renal stones. Both techniques have a comparable hospital stay and complication rates, with a significantly better SFR with mini-PCNL.

摘要

目的

比较软性输尿管镜检查(f-URS)与非卧床无管化微通道经皮肾镜取石术(mini-PCNL)治疗1-2厘米下盏肾结石的安全性和有效性。

患者与方法

在一项随机对照试验中,对2020年10月至2023年11月期间接受f-URS和mini-PCNL治疗1-2厘米下盏肾结石的患者进行评估。该研究共纳入72例患者。所有患者在术前、术后第1天(POD 1)和3个月随访时均接受了计算机断层扫描肾绞痛扫描。我们比较了围手术期结果,包括手术时间和住院时间。此外,我们评估了随访结果,如结石清除率(SFR)和并发症。所有患者均在手术当天出院回家。

结果

两个手术组术前基线数据无显著差异。mini-PCNL组的中位手术时间显著更长(P = 0.04)。mini-PCNL组和f-URS组的中位住院时间分别为5小时和4小时(P = 0.14)。在POD 1时,定义为无0厘米残留碎片的SFR,mini-PCNL组为50%,f-URS组为11.1%(P < 0.001)。当采用<0.4厘米的总截断值时,mini-PCNL组的SFR为75%,f-URS组为22.2%(P < 0.001)。在3个月随访时,mini-PCNL组的SFR仍良好,为72.2%,f-URS组为37.1%(P = 0.003),截断值为0厘米;当采用<0.4厘米的总截断值时,mini-PCNL组的SFR升至86.1%,f-URS组为65.7%(P = 0.04)。两组术后并发症无显著差异。f-URS组有2例患者(5.7%)需要再次治疗。[2024年11月5日首次在线发表后添加的更正:在结果部分,'<4 cm'已更正为'<0.4 cm'。]结论:非卧床无管化mini-PCNL和f-URS是治疗1-2厘米下盏肾结石的有效治疗选择。两种技术的住院时间和并发症发生率相当,mini-PCNL的SFR明显更好。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验