Skip to main content
Erschienen in: World Journal of Urology 7/2018

16.02.2018 | Invited Review

Miniaturised percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus flexible ureteropyeloscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing clinical efficacy and safety profile

verfasst von: N. F. Davis, M. R. Quinlan, C. Poyet, N. Lawrentschuk, D. M. Bolton, D. Webb, G. S. Jack

Erschienen in: World Journal of Urology | Ausgabe 7/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to comparatively evaluate clinical outcomes of mini-PCNL and FURS for treating urinary tract calculi in a single session.

Methods

A systematic search using electronic databases was performed for studies comparing mini-PCNL and FURS for the treatment of urinary tract calculi. The primary outcome measurements were stone-free rates (SFRs) and complication rates for both techniques. Secondary outcome measurements were to compare patient demographics, operative duration, and inpatient stay. Meta-analysis was performed with Review Manager version 5.3 software.

Results

Sixteen studies on 1598 patients (n = 877 for mini-PCNL and n = 721 for FURS) met inclusion criteria. Demographics including age (p = 0.26), body mass index (BMI) (p = 0.51), and gender ratio (p = 0.6), were similar in both groups. Overall, SFR was significantly greater in the mini-PCNL group compared to the FURS group (n = 763/877, 89.3 ± 8.4% versus n = 559/721, 80.1 ± 13.3% [OR 2.01; 95% CI 1.53–2.64; p < 0.01]). Duration of inpatient stay was significantly greater in the mini-PCNL group compared to the FURS group (n = 877, 4 ± 1.6 days versus n = 721, 2.5 ± 2.2 days, respectively [WMD: 1.77; 95% CI 1.16–2.38, p < 0.01]. Overall complication rates were not significantly different between mini-PCNL and FURS (n = 171/877, 19.5 ± 19.1% versus n = 112/721, 15.5 ± 18.9%, respectively [OR 1.43; 95% CI 0.85–2.4, p = 0.18]).

Conclusions

Mini-PCNL is associated with greater SFRs and longer inpatient stay compared to FURS. Complication rates were similar for both techniques. The advantages and disadvantages of both technologies should be familiar to urologists and conveyed to patients prior to urological intervention for nephrolithiasis.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Türk C, Petřík A, Sarica K, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, Straub M et al (2016) EAU Guidelines on interventional treatment for urolithiasis. Eur Urol 69(3):475–482CrossRefPubMed Türk C, Petřík A, Sarica K, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, Straub M et al (2016) EAU Guidelines on interventional treatment for urolithiasis. Eur Urol 69(3):475–482CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Assimos D, Krambeck A, Miller NL, Monga M, Murad MH, Nelson CP et al (2016) Surgical management of stones: American Urological Association/Endourological Society Guideline, PART II. J Urol 196(4):1161–1169CrossRefPubMed Assimos D, Krambeck A, Miller NL, Monga M, Murad MH, Nelson CP et al (2016) Surgical management of stones: American Urological Association/Endourological Society Guideline, PART II. J Urol 196(4):1161–1169CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Fernström I, Johansson B (1976) Percutaneous pyelolithotomy. A new extraction technique. Scand J Urol Nephrol 10(3):257–259CrossRefPubMed Fernström I, Johansson B (1976) Percutaneous pyelolithotomy. A new extraction technique. Scand J Urol Nephrol 10(3):257–259CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat De S, Autorino R, Kim FJ, Zargar H, Laydner H, Balsamo R et al (2015) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 67:125–137CrossRefPubMed De S, Autorino R, Kim FJ, Zargar H, Laydner H, Balsamo R et al (2015) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 67:125–137CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat de la Rosette J, Assimos D, Desai M, Gutierrez J, Lingeman J, Scarpa R et al (2011) The clinical research office of the endourological society percutaneous nephrolithotomy global study: indications, complications, and outcomes in 5803 patients. J Endourol 25(1):11–17CrossRefPubMed de la Rosette J, Assimos D, Desai M, Gutierrez J, Lingeman J, Scarpa R et al (2011) The clinical research office of the endourological society percutaneous nephrolithotomy global study: indications, complications, and outcomes in 5803 patients. J Endourol 25(1):11–17CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Monga M, Oglievie S (2000) Mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 14(3):269–272CrossRef Monga M, Oglievie S (2000) Mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 14(3):269–272CrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Jackman SV, Docimo SG, Cadeddu J, Bishoff JT, Kavoussi LR, Jarrett TW (1998) The “mini-perc” technique: a less invasive alternative to percutaneous nephrolithotomy. World J Urol 16(6):371–374CrossRefPubMed Jackman SV, Docimo SG, Cadeddu J, Bishoff JT, Kavoussi LR, Jarrett TW (1998) The “mini-perc” technique: a less invasive alternative to percutaneous nephrolithotomy. World J Urol 16(6):371–374CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Zhu W, Liu Y, Liu L, Lei M, Yuan J, Wan SP et al (2015) Minimally invasive versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis. Urolithiasis 43(6):563–570CrossRefPubMed Zhu W, Liu Y, Liu L, Lei M, Yuan J, Wan SP et al (2015) Minimally invasive versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis. Urolithiasis 43(6):563–570CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Donaldson JF, Lardas M, Scrimgeour D, Stewart F, Maclennan S, Lam TBL 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(4):612–616CrossRefPubMed Donaldson JF, Lardas M, Scrimgeour D, Stewart F, Maclennan S, Lam TBL 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(4):612–616CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Clark HD, Wells GA, Huët C, McAlister FA, Salmi LR, Fergusson D et al (1999) Assessing the quality of randomized trials: reliability of the Jadad scale. Control Clin Trials 20(5):448–452CrossRefPubMed Clark HD, Wells GA, Huët C, McAlister FA, Salmi LR, Fergusson D et al (1999) Assessing the quality of randomized trials: reliability of the Jadad scale. Control Clin Trials 20(5):448–452CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Xiao-jian G, Jian Lin L, Yan X (2013) Treatment of large impacted proximal ureteral stones: randomized comparison of minimally invasive percutaneous antegrade ureterolithotripsy versus retrograde ureterolithotripsy. World J Urol 31(6):1605–1610CrossRef Xiao-jian G, Jian Lin L, Yan X (2013) Treatment of large impacted proximal ureteral stones: randomized comparison of minimally invasive percutaneous antegrade ureterolithotripsy versus retrograde ureterolithotripsy. World J Urol 31(6):1605–1610CrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Singh H (2015) A prospective, randomized comparison of shock wave lithotripsy, retrograde intrarenal surgery and miniperc for treatment of 1 to 2 cm radiolucent lower calyceal renal calculi: a single center experience. J Urol 193(1):160–164CrossRefPubMed Singh H (2015) A prospective, randomized comparison of shock wave lithotripsy, retrograde intrarenal surgery and miniperc for treatment of 1 to 2 cm radiolucent lower calyceal renal calculi: a single center experience. J Urol 193(1):160–164CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Lee JW, Park J, Lee SB, Son H, Cho SY, Jeong H (2015) Mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stones larger than 10 mm: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Urology 86(5):873–877CrossRefPubMed Lee JW, Park J, Lee SB, Son H, Cho SY, Jeong H (2015) Mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stones larger than 10 mm: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Urology 86(5):873–877CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Knoll T, Jessen JP, Honeck P, Wendt-Nordahl G (2011) Flexible ureterorenoscopy versus miniaturized PNL for solitary renal calculi of 10–30 mm size. World J Urol 29(6):755–759CrossRefPubMed Knoll T, Jessen JP, Honeck P, Wendt-Nordahl G (2011) Flexible ureterorenoscopy versus miniaturized PNL for solitary renal calculi of 10–30 mm size. World J Urol 29(6):755–759CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Pan J, Chen Q, Xue W, Chen Y, Xia L, Chen H et al (2013) RIRS versus mPCNL for single renal stone of 2–3 cm: clinical outcome and cost-effective analysis in Chinese medical setting. Urol Res 41(1):73–78 Pan J, Chen Q, Xue W, Chen Y, Xia L, Chen H et al (2013) RIRS versus mPCNL for single renal stone of 2–3 cm: clinical outcome and cost-effective analysis in Chinese medical setting. Urol Res 41(1):73–78
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Wilhelm K, Hein S, Adams F, Schlager D, Miernik A, Schoenthaler M (2015) Ultra-mini PCNL versus flexible ureteroscopy: a matched analysis of analgesic consumption and treatment-related patient satisfaction in patients with renal stones 10–35 mm. World J Urol 33(12):2131–2136CrossRefPubMed Wilhelm K, Hein S, Adams F, Schlager D, Miernik A, Schoenthaler M (2015) Ultra-mini PCNL versus flexible ureteroscopy: a matched analysis of analgesic consumption and treatment-related patient satisfaction in patients with renal stones 10–35 mm. World J Urol 33(12):2131–2136CrossRefPubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Zeng G, Zhu W, Li J, Zhao Z, Zeng T, Liu C et al (2015) The comparison of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery for stones larger than 2 cm in patients with a solitary kidney: a matched-pair analysis. World J Urol 33(8):1159–1164CrossRefPubMed Zeng G, Zhu W, Li J, Zhao Z, Zeng T, Liu C et al (2015) The comparison of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery for stones larger than 2 cm in patients with a solitary kidney: a matched-pair analysis. World J Urol 33(8):1159–1164CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Ferroud V, Lapouge O, Dousseau A, Rakototiana A, Robert G, Ballanger P (2011) Urétéroscopie souple et mini néphrolithotomie percutanée dans le traitement des calculs pyélo-caliciels inférieurs ou égaux à 2 cm. Prog Urol 21(2):79–84CrossRefPubMed Ferroud V, Lapouge O, Dousseau A, Rakototiana A, Robert G, Ballanger P (2011) Urétéroscopie souple et mini néphrolithotomie percutanée dans le traitement des calculs pyélo-caliciels inférieurs ou égaux à 2 cm. Prog Urol 21(2):79–84CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Schoenthaler M, Wilhelm K, Hein S, Adams F, Schlager D, Wetterauer U et al (2015) Ultra-mini PCNL versus flexible ureteroscopy: a matched analysis of treatment costs (endoscopes and disposables) in patients with renal stones 10–20 mm. World J Urol 33(10):1601–1605CrossRefPubMed Schoenthaler M, Wilhelm K, Hein S, Adams F, Schlager D, Wetterauer U et al (2015) Ultra-mini PCNL versus flexible ureteroscopy: a matched analysis of treatment costs (endoscopes and disposables) in patients with renal stones 10–20 mm. World J Urol 33(10):1601–1605CrossRefPubMed
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Kruck S, Anastasiadis AG, Herrmann TRW, Walcher U, Abdelhafez MF, Nicklas AP et al (2013) Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy: an alternative to retrograde intrarenal surgery and shockwave lithotripsy. World J Urol 31(6):1555–1561CrossRefPubMed Kruck S, Anastasiadis AG, Herrmann TRW, Walcher U, Abdelhafez MF, Nicklas AP et al (2013) Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy: an alternative to retrograde intrarenal surgery and shockwave lithotripsy. World J Urol 31(6):1555–1561CrossRefPubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Ozgor F, Tepeler A, Elbir F, Sarilar O, Gurbuz ZG, Armagan A et al (2016) Comparison of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy and flexible ureterorenoscopy for the management of 10–20 mm renal stones in obese patients. World J Urol 34(8):1169–1173CrossRefPubMed Ozgor F, Tepeler A, Elbir F, Sarilar O, Gurbuz ZG, Armagan A et al (2016) Comparison of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy and flexible ureterorenoscopy for the management of 10–20 mm renal stones in obese patients. World J Urol 34(8):1169–1173CrossRefPubMed
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Zhang Y, Yu CF, Jin SH, Zhu H, Na YQ (2014) A prospective comparative study between minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy in supine position and flexible ureteroscopy in the management of single large stone in the proximal ureter. Urology 83(5):999–1002CrossRefPubMed Zhang Y, Yu CF, Jin SH, Zhu H, Na YQ (2014) A prospective comparative study between minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy in supine position and flexible ureteroscopy in the management of single large stone in the proximal ureter. Urology 83(5):999–1002CrossRefPubMed
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Kirac M, Bozkurt ÖF, Tunc L, Guneri C, Unsal A, Biri H (2013) Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery and minipercutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of lower-pole renal stones with a diameter of smaller than 15 mm. Urol Res 41(3):241–246 Kirac M, Bozkurt ÖF, Tunc L, Guneri C, Unsal A, Biri H (2013) Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery and minipercutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of lower-pole renal stones with a diameter of smaller than 15 mm. Urol Res 41(3):241–246
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Pelit ES, Atis G, Kati B, Akin Y, Çiftçi H, Culpan M et al (2017) Comparison of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery in preschool-aged children. Urology 101:21–25CrossRefPubMed Pelit ES, Atis G, Kati B, Akin Y, Çiftçi H, Culpan M et al (2017) Comparison of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery in preschool-aged children. Urology 101:21–25CrossRefPubMed
27.
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):896–899PubMed 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):896–899PubMed
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Turna B, Stein RJ, Smaldone MC, Santos BR, Kefer JC, Jackman SV et al (2008) Safety and efficacy of flexible ureterorenoscopy and holmium:YAG lithotripsy for intrarenal stones in anticoagulated cases. J Urol 179(4):1415–1419CrossRefPubMed Turna B, Stein RJ, Smaldone MC, Santos BR, Kefer JC, Jackman SV et al (2008) Safety and efficacy of flexible ureterorenoscopy and holmium:YAG lithotripsy for intrarenal stones in anticoagulated cases. J Urol 179(4):1415–1419CrossRefPubMed
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Perera M, Papa NP, Kinnear N, Wetherell D, Lawrentschuk N, Webb DR et al (2016) Urolithiasis treatment in Australia: the age of ureteroscopic intervention. J Endourol 30(11):1194–1199CrossRefPubMed Perera M, Papa NP, Kinnear N, Wetherell D, Lawrentschuk N, Webb DR et al (2016) Urolithiasis treatment in Australia: the age of ureteroscopic intervention. J Endourol 30(11):1194–1199CrossRefPubMed
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Hu H, Lu Y, He D, Cui L, Zhang J, Zhao Z et al (2016) Comparison of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy and flexible ureteroscopy for the treatment of intermediate proximal ureteral and renal stones in the elderly. Urolithiasis 44(5):427–434CrossRefPubMed Hu H, Lu Y, He D, Cui L, Zhang J, Zhao Z et al (2016) Comparison of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy and flexible ureteroscopy for the treatment of intermediate proximal ureteral and renal stones in the elderly. Urolithiasis 44(5):427–434CrossRefPubMed
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Sabnis RB, Jagtap J, Mishra S, Desai M (2012) Treating renal calculi 1–2 cm in diameter with minipercutaneous or retrograde intrarenal surgery: a prospective comparative study. BJU Int 110(8):346–349CrossRef Sabnis RB, Jagtap J, Mishra S, Desai M (2012) Treating renal calculi 1–2 cm in diameter with minipercutaneous or retrograde intrarenal surgery: a prospective comparative study. BJU Int 110(8):346–349CrossRef
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Gao XS, Liao BH, Chen YT, Feng SJ, Gao R, Luo DY, Liu JM, Wang KJ (2017) Different tract sizes of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endourol 31(11):1101–1110CrossRefPubMed Gao XS, Liao BH, Chen YT, Feng SJ, Gao R, Luo DY, Liu JM, Wang KJ (2017) Different tract sizes of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endourol 31(11):1101–1110CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Miniaturised percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus flexible ureteropyeloscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing clinical efficacy and safety profile
verfasst von
N. F. Davis
M. R. Quinlan
C. Poyet
N. Lawrentschuk
D. M. Bolton
D. Webb
G. S. Jack
Publikationsdatum
16.02.2018
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
World Journal of Urology / Ausgabe 7/2018
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2230-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2018

World Journal of Urology 7/2018 Zur Ausgabe

Update Urologie

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