Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Urolithiasis 1/2013

01.02.2013 | Original Paper

RIRS versus mPCNL for single renal stone of 2–3 cm: clinical outcome and cost-effective analysis in Chinese medical setting

verfasst von: Jiahua Pan, Qi Chen, Wei Xue, Yonghui Chen, Lei Xia, Haige Chen, Yiran Huang

Erschienen in: Urolithiasis | Ausgabe 1/2013

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The aim of the study was to compare the clinical outcome and the cost-effectiveness between retrograde intra renal surgery (RIRS) and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (mPCNL) for the management of single renal stone of 2–3 cm in Chinese medical setting. From May 2005 to February 2011, 115 patients with solitary renal calculi were treated either by RIRS or mPCNL. 56 patients were in RIRS group while 59 were in mPCNL group. Patients’ demographics between the two groups, in terms of gender, age, BMI, history of ESWL as well as stone side, stone location and stone size were comparable. Peri-operative course, clinical outcome, complication rates and medical cost were compared. The effective quotient (EQ) of two groups was calculated. Data were analyzed using Fisher’s exact test, Chi-square test and Student’s t test. EQ for RIRS and mPCNL were 0.52 and 0.90. The initial stone-free rate (SFR) of RIRS group and mPCNL group was 71.4 and 96.6 %, respectively (P = 0.000). The mean procedure number was 1.18 in RIRS group and 1.03 in mPCNL group, respectively (P = 0.035). The operative time for RIRS was longer (P = 0.000) while the mean hospital stay was shorter (P = 0.000). There was no statistical difference in peri-operative complications between the groups. The initial hospitalization cost, laboratory and radiology test cost of RIRS group were lower (P = 0.000). However, counting the retreatment cost in the two groups, the total medical expenditure including the overall hospitalization cost, overall laboratory and radiology test cost and post-operative out-patient department (OPD) visit cost was similar between two groups. In conclusion, with similar total medical cost, mPCNL achieved faster stone clearance and lower retreatment rate without major complications, which implied higher cost-effectiveness for the treatment of single renal stone of 2–3 cm in Chinese medical setting. RIRS is also a safe and reliable choice for patients having contraindications or preference against mPCNL.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Preminger GM, Assimos DG, Lingeman JE et al (2005) AUA Guideline on management of staghorn calculi: diagnosis and treatment recomendations. J Urol 173:1991–2000PubMedCrossRef Preminger GM, Assimos DG, Lingeman JE et al (2005) AUA Guideline on management of staghorn calculi: diagnosis and treatment recomendations. J Urol 173:1991–2000PubMedCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Knoll T, Wezel F, Michel MS et al (2010) Do patients benefit from miniaturized tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy? A comparative prospective study. J Endourol 24(7):1075–1079PubMedCrossRef Knoll T, Wezel F, Michel MS et al (2010) Do patients benefit from miniaturized tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy? A comparative prospective study. J Endourol 24(7):1075–1079PubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Hyams ES, Munver R, Bird VG et al (2010) Flexible ureterorenoscopy and holmium laser lithotripsy for the management of renal stone burdens that measure 2 to 3 cm: a multi-institutional experience. J Endourol 24(10):1583–1588PubMedCrossRef Hyams ES, Munver R, Bird VG et al (2010) Flexible ureterorenoscopy and holmium laser lithotripsy for the management of renal stone burdens that measure 2 to 3 cm: a multi-institutional experience. J Endourol 24(10):1583–1588PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Tolga A, Murat B, Faruk O et al (2012) Comparison of percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde flexible nephrolithotripsy for the management of 2–4 cm stones: a matched-pair analysis. BJU Int 109(9):1384–1389CrossRef Tolga A, Murat B, Faruk O et al (2012) Comparison of percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde flexible nephrolithotripsy for the management of 2–4 cm stones: a matched-pair analysis. BJU Int 109(9):1384–1389CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Monga M, Best S, Venkatesh R et al (2006) Durability of flexible ureteroscopes: a randomized, prospective study. J Urol 176(1):137–141PubMedCrossRef Monga M, Best S, Venkatesh R et al (2006) Durability of flexible ureteroscopes: a randomized, prospective study. J Urol 176(1):137–141PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Salem HK (2009) A prospective randomized study comparing shock wave lithotripsy and semirigid ureteroscopy for the management of proximal ureteral calculi. Urology 74(6):1216–1221PubMedCrossRef Salem HK (2009) A prospective randomized study comparing shock wave lithotripsy and semirigid ureteroscopy for the management of proximal ureteral calculi. Urology 74(6):1216–1221PubMedCrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Breda A, Ogunyemi O, Leppert JT et al (2008) Flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy for single intrarenal stones 2 cm or greater—is this the new frontier? J Urol 179:981–984PubMedCrossRef Breda A, Ogunyemi O, Leppert JT et al (2008) Flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy for single intrarenal stones 2 cm or greater—is this the new frontier? J Urol 179:981–984PubMedCrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Mariani AJ (2007) Combined electrohydraulic and holmium:YAG laser ureteroscopic nephrolithotripsy of large (greater than 4 cm) renal calculi. J Urol 177:168–173PubMedCrossRef Mariani AJ (2007) Combined electrohydraulic and holmium:YAG laser ureteroscopic nephrolithotripsy of large (greater than 4 cm) renal calculi. J Urol 177:168–173PubMedCrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Mishra S, Sharma R, Garg C et al (2011) Prospective comparative study of miniperc and standard PNL for treatment of 1 to 2 cm size renal stone. BJU Int 108(6):896–899PubMed Mishra S, Sharma R, Garg C et al (2011) Prospective comparative study of miniperc and standard PNL for treatment of 1 to 2 cm size renal stone. BJU Int 108(6):896–899PubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Xue W, Pacik D, Boellaard W et al (2012) Management of single large nonstaghorn renal stones in the CROES PCNL global study. J Urol 187(4):1293–1297PubMedCrossRef Xue W, Pacik D, Boellaard W et al (2012) Management of single large nonstaghorn renal stones in the CROES PCNL global study. J Urol 187(4):1293–1297PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Hussain M, Acher P, Penev B et al (2011) Redefining the limits of flexible ureterorenoscopy. J Endourol 25(1):45–49PubMedCrossRef Hussain M, Acher P, Penev B et al (2011) Redefining the limits of flexible ureterorenoscopy. J Endourol 25(1):45–49PubMedCrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Schwalb DM, Eshghi M, Davidian M et al (1993) Morphological and physiological changes in the urinary tract associated with ureteral dilation and ureteropyeloscopy: an experimental study. J Urol 149:1576–1585PubMed Schwalb DM, Eshghi M, Davidian M et al (1993) Morphological and physiological changes in the urinary tract associated with ureteral dilation and ureteropyeloscopy: an experimental study. J Urol 149:1576–1585PubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Takazawa R, Kitayama S, Tsujii T (2012) Successful outcome of flexible ureteroscopy with holmium laser lithotripsy for renal stones 2 cm or greater. Int J Urol 19(3):264–267PubMedCrossRef Takazawa R, Kitayama S, Tsujii T (2012) Successful outcome of flexible ureteroscopy with holmium laser lithotripsy for renal stones 2 cm or greater. Int J Urol 19(3):264–267PubMedCrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Chen YT, Chen J, Wong WY et al (2002) Is ureteral stenting necessary after uncomplicated ureteroscopic lithotripsy? A prospective, randomized controlled trial. J Urol 167:1977PubMedCrossRef Chen YT, Chen J, Wong WY et al (2002) Is ureteral stenting necessary after uncomplicated ureteroscopic lithotripsy? A prospective, randomized controlled trial. J Urol 167:1977PubMedCrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Damiano R, Autorino R, Esposito C et al (2004) Stent positioning after ureteroscopy for urinary calculi: the question is still open. Eur Urol 46:381PubMedCrossRef Damiano R, Autorino R, Esposito C et al (2004) Stent positioning after ureteroscopy for urinary calculi: the question is still open. Eur Urol 46:381PubMedCrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Shao Y, Zhuo J, Sun XW et al (2008) Nonstented versus routine stented ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy: a prospective randomized trial. Urol Res 36:259PubMedCrossRef Shao Y, Zhuo J, Sun XW et al (2008) Nonstented versus routine stented ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy: a prospective randomized trial. Urol Res 36:259PubMedCrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Xu Y, Wei Q, Liu LR (2009) A prospective randomized trial comparing non-stented versus routine stented ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy. Saudi Med J 30:1276PubMed Xu Y, Wei Q, Liu LR (2009) A prospective randomized trial comparing non-stented versus routine stented ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy. Saudi Med J 30:1276PubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Chambade D, Thibault F, Niang L et al (2006) Study of the safety of double J ureteric stents. Prog Urol 16(4):445–449PubMed Chambade D, Thibault F, Niang L et al (2006) Study of the safety of double J ureteric stents. Prog Urol 16(4):445–449PubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Knudsen B, Miyaoka R, Shah K et al (2010) Durability of the next-generation flexible fiberoptic ureteroscopes: a randomized prospective multi-institutional clinical trial. Urology. 75(3):534–538PubMedCrossRef Knudsen B, Miyaoka R, Shah K et al (2010) Durability of the next-generation flexible fiberoptic ureteroscopes: a randomized prospective multi-institutional clinical trial. Urology. 75(3):534–538PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
RIRS versus mPCNL for single renal stone of 2–3 cm: clinical outcome and cost-effective analysis in Chinese medical setting
verfasst von
Jiahua Pan
Qi Chen
Wei Xue
Yonghui Chen
Lei Xia
Haige Chen
Yiran Huang
Publikationsdatum
01.02.2013
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
Urolithiasis / Ausgabe 1/2013
Print ISSN: 2194-7228
Elektronische ISSN: 2194-7236
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-012-0533-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2013

Urolithiasis 1/2013 Zur Ausgabe

Update Urologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.