Skip to main content
Erschienen in: World Journal of Urology 6/2011

01.12.2011 | Original Article

Flexible ureterorenoscopy versus miniaturized PNL for solitary renal calculi of 10–30 mm size

verfasst von: Thomas Knoll, Jan Peter Jessen, Patrick Honeck, Gunnar Wendt-Nordahl

Erschienen in: World Journal of Urology | Ausgabe 6/2011

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction

The value of flexible ureterorenoscopy (fURS) and miniaturized PNL (mPNL) for larger renal calculi is under discussion. This non-randomized prospective study aimed to evaluate fURS and mPNL for solitary renal stones of 10–30 mm size.

Materials and methods

fURS was carried out in 21 patients with last generation 7.5F endoscopes. Ureteral access sheaths were used in 19 patients. For mPNL, an 18F modified Amplatz sheath with a 14F nephroscope were used (n = 25). The procedure was performed either tubeless with an antegrade stent or a nephrostomy. Outcome and complications of both procedures were assessed.

Results

Patients’ demographics and stone sizes were comparable (18 ± 5 vs. 19 ± 4 mm, P = 0.08). Patients in the fURS group had a higher mean BMI (31 vs. 27, P < 0.05). Total OR time was significantly longer for fURS (106 ± 51 vs. 59 ± 19 min., P < 0.001). More patients were stone-free after one single percutaneous treatment, while 2nd-stage treatments with fURS were common (total procedures 1.04 vs. 1.52, P < 0.001; immediate stone-free rate (SFR) 96% vs. 71.5%, P < 0.001). SFR after 4 weeks was 100% (mPNL) and 85.8% (fURS) (P < 0.01). Minor complications as classified by Clavien I or II occurred in 16 and 23.8%, mPNL and fURS, respectively, P = 0.13). No major complications (Clavien III–V) occured in both groups.

Conclusions

Our series supports both the concept of either percutaneous or retrograde endoscopic treatment for renal calculi with both modalities offering excellent safety. However, while for fURS, a significantly higher rate of 2nd-stage procedures was necessary, and mPNL led to faster and higher SFR without increasing complication rate.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Osman M, Wendt-Nordahl G, Heger K et al (2005) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy with ultrasonography-guided renal access: experience from over 300 cases. BJU Int 96:875PubMedCrossRef Osman M, Wendt-Nordahl G, Heger K et al (2005) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy with ultrasonography-guided renal access: experience from over 300 cases. BJU Int 96:875PubMedCrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Türk C, Knoll T, Petric A et al. (2011) Guidelines on urolithiasis. Online Türk C, Knoll T, Petric A et al. (2011) Guidelines on urolithiasis. Online
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Nagele U, Schilling D, Sievert KD et al (2008) Management of lower-pole stones of 0.8 to 1.5 cm maximal diameter by the minimally invasive percutaneous approach. J Endourol 22:1851PubMedCrossRef Nagele U, Schilling D, Sievert KD et al (2008) Management of lower-pole stones of 0.8 to 1.5 cm maximal diameter by the minimally invasive percutaneous approach. J Endourol 22:1851PubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Lahme S, Bichler KH, Strohmaier WL et al (2001) Minimally invasive PCNL in patients with renal pelvic and calyceal stones. Eur Urol 40:619PubMedCrossRef Lahme S, Bichler KH, Strohmaier WL et al (2001) Minimally invasive PCNL in patients with renal pelvic and calyceal stones. Eur Urol 40:619PubMedCrossRef
5.
6.
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 24:1075PubMedCrossRef Knoll T, Wezel F, Michel MS et al (2010) Do patients benefit from miniaturized tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy? A comparative prospective study. J Endourol 24:1075PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Mishra S, Sharma R, Garg C, Kurien A, Sabnis R, Desai M (2011) Prospective comparative study of miniperc and standard PNL for treatment of 1 to 2 cm size renal stone. BJU Int 108(6):896–899; discussion 899–900. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09936.x Mishra S, Sharma R, Garg C, Kurien A, Sabnis R, Desai M (2011) Prospective comparative study of miniperc and standard PNL for treatment of 1 to 2 cm size renal stone. BJU Int 108(6):896–899; discussion 899–900. doi:10.​1111/​j.​1464-410X.​2010.​09936.​x
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Wendt-Nordahl G, Mut T, Krombach P, Michel MS, Knoll T (2011) Do new generation flexible ureterorenoscopes offer a higher treatment success than their predecessors? Urol Res 39(3):185–188PubMedCrossRef Wendt-Nordahl G, Mut T, Krombach P, Michel MS, Knoll T (2011) Do new generation flexible ureterorenoscopes offer a higher treatment success than their predecessors? Urol Res 39(3):185–188PubMedCrossRef
9.
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Wendt NG, Trojan L, Alken P et al (2007) Ureteroscopy for stone treatment using new 270 degrees semiflexible endoscope: in vitro, ex vivo, and clinical application. J Endourol 21:1439CrossRef Wendt NG, Trojan L, Alken P et al (2007) Ureteroscopy for stone treatment using new 270 degrees semiflexible endoscope: in vitro, ex vivo, and clinical application. J Endourol 21:1439CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Preminger GM (2006) Management of lower pole renal calculi: shock wave lithotripsy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus flexible ureteroscopy. Urol Res 34:108PubMedCrossRef Preminger GM (2006) Management of lower pole renal calculi: shock wave lithotripsy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus flexible ureteroscopy. Urol Res 34:108PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Knoll T, Michel MS, Alken P (2007) Surgical Atlas. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: the Mannheim technique. BJU Int 99:213PubMedCrossRef Knoll T, Michel MS, Alken P (2007) Surgical Atlas. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: the Mannheim technique. BJU Int 99:213PubMedCrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat de la Rosette JJ, Zuazu JR, Tsakiris P et al (2008) Prognostic factors and percutaneous nephrolithotomy morbidity: a multivariate analysis of a contemporary series using the Clavien classification. J Urol 180:2489CrossRef de la Rosette JJ, Zuazu JR, Tsakiris P et al (2008) Prognostic factors and percutaneous nephrolithotomy morbidity: a multivariate analysis of a contemporary series using the Clavien classification. J Urol 180:2489CrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Osman MM, Alfano Y, Kamp S et al (2005) 5-year-follow-up of patients with clinically insignificant residual fragments after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. Eur Urol 47:860PubMedCrossRef Osman MM, Alfano Y, Kamp S et al (2005) 5-year-follow-up of patients with clinically insignificant residual fragments after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. Eur Urol 47:860PubMedCrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Pearle MS, Lingeman JE, Leveillee R et al (2005) Prospective, randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi 1 cm or less. J Urol 173:2005PubMedCrossRef Pearle MS, Lingeman JE, Leveillee R et al (2005) Prospective, randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi 1 cm or less. J Urol 173:2005PubMedCrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Albala DM, Assimos DG, Clayman RV et al (2001) Lower pole I: a prospective randomized trial of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrostolithotomy for lower pole nephrolithiasis-initial results. J Urol 166:2072PubMedCrossRef Albala DM, Assimos DG, Clayman RV et al (2001) Lower pole I: a prospective randomized trial of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrostolithotomy for lower pole nephrolithiasis-initial results. J Urol 166:2072PubMedCrossRef
17.
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 24:1583PubMedCrossRef 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 24:1583PubMedCrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Riley JM, Stearman L, Troxel S (2009) Retrograde ureteroscopy for renal stones larger than 25 cm. J Endourol 23:1395PubMedCrossRef Riley JM, Stearman L, Troxel S (2009) Retrograde ureteroscopy for renal stones larger than 25 cm. J Endourol 23:1395PubMedCrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Srisubat A, Potisat S, Lojanapiwat B et al (2009) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev: CD007044 Srisubat A, Potisat S, Lojanapiwat B et al (2009) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev: CD007044
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Nagele U, Horstmann M, Sievert KD et al (2007) A newly designed amplatz sheath decreases intrapelvic irrigation pressure during mini-percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy: an in vitro pressure-measurement and microscopic study. J Endourol 21:1113PubMedCrossRef Nagele U, Horstmann M, Sievert KD et al (2007) A newly designed amplatz sheath decreases intrapelvic irrigation pressure during mini-percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy: an in vitro pressure-measurement and microscopic study. J Endourol 21:1113PubMedCrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Li LY, Gao X, Yang M et al (2010) Does a smaller tract in percutaneous nephrolithotomy contribute to less invasiveness? A prospective comparative study. Urology 75:56PubMedCrossRef Li LY, Gao X, Yang M et al (2010) Does a smaller tract in percutaneous nephrolithotomy contribute to less invasiveness? A prospective comparative study. Urology 75:56PubMedCrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Wendt-Nordahl G, Trojan L, Alken P et al (2007) Ureteroscopy for stone treatment using new 270 degrees semiflexible endoscope: in vitro, ex vivo, and clinical application. J Endourol 21:1439PubMedCrossRef Wendt-Nordahl G, Trojan L, Alken P et al (2007) Ureteroscopy for stone treatment using new 270 degrees semiflexible endoscope: in vitro, ex vivo, and clinical application. J Endourol 21:1439PubMedCrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Hussain M, Acher P, Penev B et al (2011) Redefining the limits of flexible ureterorenoscopy. J Endourol 25:45PubMedCrossRef Hussain M, Acher P, Penev B et al (2011) Redefining the limits of flexible ureterorenoscopy. J Endourol 25:45PubMedCrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Herrera-Gonzalez G, Netsch C, Oberhagemann K et al (2011) Effectiveness of single flexible ureteroscopy for multiple renal calculi. J Endourol 25:431PubMedCrossRef Herrera-Gonzalez G, Netsch C, Oberhagemann K et al (2011) Effectiveness of single flexible ureteroscopy for multiple renal calculi. J Endourol 25:431PubMedCrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Riley JM, Stearman L, Troxel S (2009) Retrograde ureteroscopy for renal stones larger than 2.5 cm. J Endourol 23:1395PubMedCrossRef Riley JM, Stearman L, Troxel S (2009) Retrograde ureteroscopy for renal stones larger than 2.5 cm. J Endourol 23:1395PubMedCrossRef
26.
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 179:981PubMedCrossRef 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 179:981PubMedCrossRef
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Mariani AJ (2007) Combined electrohydraulic and holmium: YAG laser ureteroscopic nephrolithotripsy of large (greater than 4 cm) renal calculi. J Urol 177:168PubMedCrossRef Mariani AJ (2007) Combined electrohydraulic and holmium: YAG laser ureteroscopic nephrolithotripsy of large (greater than 4 cm) renal calculi. J Urol 177:168PubMedCrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Binbay M, Yuruk E, Akman T, Ozgor F, Seyrek M, Ozkuvanci U, Berberoglu Y, Muslumanoglu AY (2010) Is there a difference in outcomes between digital and fiberoptic flexible ureterorenoscopy procedures? J Endourol 24(12):1929–1934 Binbay M, Yuruk E, Akman T, Ozgor F, Seyrek M, Ozkuvanci U, Berberoglu Y, Muslumanoglu AY (2010) Is there a difference in outcomes between digital and fiberoptic flexible ureterorenoscopy procedures? J Endourol 24(12):1929–1934
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Turna B, Stein RJ, Smaldone MC et al (2008) Safety and efficacy of flexible ureterorenoscopy and holmium: YAG lithotripsy for intrarenal stones in anticoagulated cases. J Urol 179:1415PubMedCrossRef Turna B, Stein RJ, Smaldone MC et al (2008) Safety and efficacy of flexible ureterorenoscopy and holmium: YAG lithotripsy for intrarenal stones in anticoagulated cases. J Urol 179:1415PubMedCrossRef
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Shine S (2008) Urinary calculus: IVU vs. CT renal stone? A critically appraised topic. Abdom Imaging 33:41PubMedCrossRef Shine S (2008) Urinary calculus: IVU vs. CT renal stone? A critically appraised topic. Abdom Imaging 33:41PubMedCrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Mitterberger M, Pinggera GM, Pallwein L et al (2007) Plain abdominal radiography with transabdominal native tissue harmonic imaging ultrasonography vs unenhanced computed tomography in renal colic. BJU Int 100:887PubMedCrossRef Mitterberger M, Pinggera GM, Pallwein L et al (2007) Plain abdominal radiography with transabdominal native tissue harmonic imaging ultrasonography vs unenhanced computed tomography in renal colic. BJU Int 100:887PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Flexible ureterorenoscopy versus miniaturized PNL for solitary renal calculi of 10–30 mm size
verfasst von
Thomas Knoll
Jan Peter Jessen
Patrick Honeck
Gunnar Wendt-Nordahl
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2011
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
World Journal of Urology / Ausgabe 6/2011
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-011-0784-y

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2011

World Journal of Urology 6/2011 Zur Ausgabe

Update Urologie

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