Outcomes and Costs Following Mini-percutaneous Nephrolithotomy or Flexible Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy for 1-2–cm Renal Stones: Data From a Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial
- 1 June 2023
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) in Journal of Urology
- Vol. 209 (6), 1151-1158
- https://doi.org/10.1097/ju.0000000000003397
Abstract
Purpose: We evaluate the outcomes of ureteroscopy vs prone mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy for 1-2-cm renal stones using a 2-group parallel randomized control trial. Materials and Methods: Adult patients presenting with renal stones between 1 and 2 cm were randomized. Exclusion criteria included solitary kidney, multiple stones, and comorbidities precluding prone positioning. Block randomization was performed and was opened to the surgeon the morning of the procedure. Stone-free rate was evaluated by computed tomography 1-30 days postoperatively. Complications, re-treatment rates, and costs were evaluated. Results: A total of 51 mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy and 50 ureteroscopy patients were included. Baseline demographics were similar. Using a 2-mm cutoff, stone-free rate was higher in the mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy group (76 vs 46%, P = .0023). The residual stone burden was significantly higher in the ureteroscopy group than the mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy group (3.6 vs 1.4 mm, P = .0026). Fluoroscopy time was significantly higher in the mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy group (273 vs 49 seconds, P < .0001). There were no differences in postoperative complications within 30 days, the necessity of a secondary procedure within 30 days, and pre- to postoperative creatinine change (P > .05). Surgical time did not vary significantly (P = .1788). Average length of stay was higher in the mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy group (P < .0001). Both net revenue and direct costs were higher in mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures (P < .05), though they offset each other with a nonsignificant operating margin (P = .2541). Conclusions: In a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial using a 2-mm residual stone burden cutoff, mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy was more likely to render patients stone-free than flexible ureteroscopy. Complications, surgical times, and operating margins did not vary between the approaches.Keywords
This publication has 27 references indexed in Scilit:
- MinipercCurrent Opinion in Urology, 2012
- Flexible ureterorenoscopy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of lower pole stones of 10–20 mmBJU International, 2012
- CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trialsInternational Journal of Surgery, 2012
- Operating Times and Bleeding Complications in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Comparison of Tract Dilation Methods in 5537 Patients in the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Global StudyJournal of Endourology, 2011
- Prospective comparative study of Miniperc and standard PNL for treatment of 1 to 2 cm size renal stoneBJU International, 2011
- The Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Global Study: Indications, Complications, and Outcomes in 5803 PatientsJournal of Endourology, 2011
- Percutaneous Nephrostolithotomy Versus Flexible Ureteroscopy/Holmium Laser Lithotripsy: Cost and Outcome AnalysisJournal of Urology, 2009
- Percutaneous Renal Access: A Simplified ApproachJournal of Endourology, 2007
- Durability of Flexible Ureteroscopes: A Randomized, Prospective StudyJournal of Urology, 2006
- Classification of Surgical ComplicationsAnnals of Surgery, 2004