1
|
Zhang S, Ren H, Li X, Long Q, Wu D, Chen W. Propensity score matched comparison of transperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for management of large impacted proximal ureteral stones with long-term follow-up. Urolithiasis 2024; 52:109. [PMID: 39073726 DOI: 10.1007/s00240-024-01609-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2024] [Accepted: 07/20/2024] [Indexed: 07/30/2024]
Abstract
Impacted proximal ureteral stones (IPUS) present challenging clinical scenarios due to their persistent nature and associated complications. While ureterorenoscopy (URS) lithotripsy is recommended as the primary treatment, controversies exist regarding the optimal management of such stones. In this retrospective analysis, we compared the operative outcomes and long-term results of transperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (LU) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for IPUS larger than 15 mm. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to mitigate potential selection biases. Following PSM, 83 patients in each cohort exhibited comparable baseline characteristics. LU demonstrated a superior surgical success rate (100% vs. 96.4%, p = 0.244) and significantly lower perioperative hemoglobin decline (0.6 ± 0.4 g/dL vs. 1.5 ± 0.7 g/dL, p = 0.036) compared to PCNL. Additionally, LU exhibited a higher stone-free rate after 2 months (100% vs. 91.6%, p = 0.043), but a longer duration of catheterization (7.4 ± 1.2 days vs. 3.5 ± 2.2 days vs., p = 0.011). Conversely, PCNL was associated with a higher incidence of total complications (21.7% vs. 9.6%, p = 0.033) and stone recurrence during a mean period of 40-month follow-up (20.5% vs. 8.4%, p = 0.027). Transperitoneal LU and PCNL represent effective interventions for managing IPUS exceeding 15 mm. Notably, LU emerges as a preferable option over PCNL, offering superior stone clearance rates, reduced perioperative complications, and lower recurrence rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shijun Zhang
- Department of Urology, The First Hospital of Yulin, Yulin, People's Republic of China
| | - Haomin Ren
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, People's Republic of China
| | - Xiang Li
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, 277 West Yanta Road, Xi'an, Shaanxi, 710061, People's Republic of China
| | - Qingzhi Long
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, 277 West Yanta Road, Xi'an, Shaanxi, 710061, People's Republic of China
| | - Dapeng Wu
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, 277 West Yanta Road, Xi'an, Shaanxi, 710061, People's Republic of China
| | - Wei Chen
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, 277 West Yanta Road, Xi'an, Shaanxi, 710061, People's Republic of China.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Anan G, Kudo D, Matsuoka T, Kaiho Y, Sato M. The impact of preoperative percutaneous nephrostomy as a treatment strategy before flexible ureteroscopy for impacted upper ureteral stones with hydronephrosis. Transl Androl Urol 2021; 10:3756-3765. [PMID: 34804819 PMCID: PMC8575573 DOI: 10.21037/tau-21-547] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2021] [Accepted: 09/02/2021] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The treatment of impacted upper ureteral stones with hydronephrosis remains a challenge for urologists. The current study aimed to evaluate the impact of preoperative percutaneous nephrostomy (PNS) as a treatment strategy before flexible ureteroscopy (f-URS) of asymptomatic impacted upper ureteral stones with hydronephrosis. Methods This multicenter retrospective study included patients who underwent PNS (group A, n=61) and those who did not (group B, n=75) before f-URS for asymptomatic impacted upper ureteral stones with hydronephrosis. Impacted ureteral stones are defined as those that remain in one position for >2 months. Operative outcomes, including stone-free rate, operation time, postoperative hospital days, and complication rate, were evaluated. Results There were no significant differences in age, sex, and stone size between the two groups except in the grade of hydronephrosis, with group A having more cases of advanced hydronephrosis than group B. The stone-free rate was significantly higher in group A than in group B [95% vs. 77% (P=0.004)]. However, there were no significant differences between the groups in operation time [55 vs. 55 min (P=0.84)], postoperative fever [5% vs. 5% (P=1.00)], and postoperative hospital days [2 vs. 2 days (P=0.44)]. In group A, preoperative PNS placement was performed 4 days before f-URS, and the PNS was removed postoperatively on the same day of the f-URS. Additionally, subgroup analysis was performed in cases of grade 2 and 3 hydronephrosis. A total of 110 patients, 60 who underwent f-URS with PNS and 50 who underwent f-URS without PNS, were included. The stone-free rate was significantly higher in f-URS with PNS than in f-URS without PNS [95% vs. 76% (P=0.005)]. However, no significant differences were found between the groups in operation time, ureteral injury, postoperative fever, and postoperative hospital days. Conclusions At grade 2 or 3 hydronephrosis, preoperative PNS as a treatment strategy for a few days prior to f-URS for impacted upper ureteral stones improved the stone-free rate without increasing the operation time and postoperative length of hospital stay.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Go Anan
- Department of Urology, Tohoku Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Sendai, Japan
| | - Daisuke Kudo
- Department of Urology, Morioka Municipal Hospital, Morioka, Japan
| | | | - Yasuhiro Kaiho
- Department of Urology, Tohoku Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Sendai, Japan
| | - Makoto Sato
- Department of Urology, Tohoku Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Sendai, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Comparison of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for treatment of impacted proximal ureteral stones greater than 15 mm. Chin Med J (Engl) 2021; 134:1209-1214. [PMID: 33813518 PMCID: PMC8143756 DOI: 10.1097/cm9.0000000000001417] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The optimal treatment for large impacted proximal ureteral stones remains controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and potential complications of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) and retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (RPLU) in the treatment of impacted proximal ureteral stones with size greater than 15 mm. METHODS A total of 268 patients with impacted proximal ureteral stones greater than 15 mm who received MPCNL or RPLU procedures were enrolled consecutively between January 2014 and January 2019. Data on surgical outcomes and complications were collected and analyzed. RESULTS Demographic and ureteral stone characteristics found between these two groups were not significantly different. The surgical success rate (139/142, 97.9% vs. 121/126, 96.0%, P = 0.595) and stone-free rate after 1 month (139/142, 97.9% vs. 119/126, 94.4%, P = 0.245) of RPLU group were marginally higher than that of the MPCNL group, but there was no significant difference. There was no significant difference in the drop of hemoglobin between the two groups (0.8 ± 0.6 vs. 0.4 ± 0. 2 g/dL, P = 0.621). The mean operative time (68.2 ± 12.5 vs. 87.2 ± 16.8 min, P = 0.041), post-operative analgesics usage (2/121, 1.7% vs. 13/139, 9.4%, P = 0.017), length of hospital stay after surgery (2.2 ± 0.6 vs. 4.8 ± 0.9 days, P < 0.001), double J stent time (3.2 ± 0.5 vs. 3.9 ± 0.8 days, P = 0.027), time of catheterization (1.1 ± 0.3 vs. 3.5 ± 0.5 days, P < 0.001), and time of drainage tube (2.3 ± 0.3 vs. 4.6 ± 0.6 days, P < 0.001) of MPCNL group were significantly shorter than that of the RPLU group. The complication rate was similar between the two groups (20/121, 16.5% vs. 31/139, 22.3%, P = 0.242). CONCLUSIONS MPCNL and RPLU have similar surgical success and stone clearance in treating impacted proximal ureteral stones greater than 15 mm, while patients undergoing MPCNL had a lower post-operative pain rate and a faster recovery.
Collapse
|
4
|
El-Nahas AR, Khadgi S, Diab M, Al-Terki A. Definition and Unfavorable Risk Factors of Trifecta in Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 2021; 35:1140-1145. [PMID: 33554728 DOI: 10.1089/end.2020.1192] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Objectives: In performing mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), we aimed at achieving the trifecta of stone-free status and no complications in a single treatment session. We analyzed our experience to determine negative predictors for achieving these three-fold goals. Patients and Methods: The data of all consecutive patients who underwent tubeless mini-PCNL between July 2015 and March 2020 in two hospitals were retrospectively reviewed. Stone-free was defined as no residual stones. Complications were recorded and graded according to modified Clavien classification. Patients were divided into two groups according to the outcome (trifecta and non-trifecta). Factors affecting the outcome were compared between both groups by using univariate and multivariate analyses to detect independent unfavorable risk factors. Results: The study included 944 patients with mean age 40.2 years (standard deviation: 13.6). The stone-free rate after one session of mini-PCNL was 90.7%. Auxiliary procedures were needed in 14 patients (1.5%). Complications were observed in 76 patients (8.1%). Trifecta was achieved in 792 patients (84%). Independent unfavorable risk factors in multivariate analysis were number of caliceal groups affected by the stones (relative risks were 1.95 to 2.27 and 5.7 for one, two, and three caliceal groups respectively) and number of percutaneous tracts (relative risk was 2.2). Stone size and complexity were not significant predictors of missing trifecta in multivariate analysis. Conclusions: Mini-PCNL can achieve a high rate of trifecta (84%) for different stone sizes and complexities. Stones distribution in multiple caliceal groups and multiple tracts are the independent unfavorable risk factor.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ahmed R El-Nahas
- Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt.,Urology Unit, AL-Amiri Hospital, Kuwait, Kuwait
| | - Sanjay Khadgi
- Department of Urology, Vayodha Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Chen H, Zhu Z, Cui Y, Li Y, Chen Z, Yang Z, Zeng F. Suctioning semirigid ureteroscopic lithotomy versus minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy for large upper ureteral stones: a retrospective study. Transl Androl Urol 2021; 10:1056-1063. [PMID: 33850740 PMCID: PMC8039583 DOI: 10.21037/tau-20-1218] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
Background To compare the safety and validity of a suctioning semirigid ureteroscopic lithotomy (Sotn-URSL) and minimally percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) in treating upper ureteral stone larger than 15 mm. Methods Between February 2018 and December 2019, 97 patients who had upper ureteral stone >15 mm were consecutively included in this study. Forty-six patients underwent Sotn-URSL and 51 underwent mPCNL by the same surgeon. The following parameters were retrospectively assessed: patient and stone characteristics, surgical details, perioperative outcomes, and stone-free rates (SFRs). Results No significant difference was observed in two groups for patient and stone characteristics, except that mPCNL group had a higher incidence of severe hydronephrosis (19.6% vs. 41.2%, P=0.021). Sotn-URSL group was similar to mPCNL group in terms of the mean duration of surgery (50.5±5.9 vs. 52.9±8.0 min, P=0.106) and the SFR after 1 month (91.3% vs. 98%, P=0.187). The hospital stay after surgery of Sotn-URSL group was significant shorter than mPCNL group (1.4±0.6 vs. 2.3±0.7 days, P<0.001), and postoperative complications in Sotn-URSL group was less, especially postoperative pain (P=0.044). Conclusions Both mPCNL and Sotn-URSL are suitable for upper ureteral stones with a diameter of >15 mm. Nevertheless, further well-designed studies with long-term follow-up are needed to confirmed the results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hequn Chen
- Department of Urology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China
| | - Zewu Zhu
- Department of Urology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China
| | - Yu Cui
- Department of Urology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China
| | - Yang Li
- Department of Urology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China
| | - Zhiyong Chen
- Department of Urology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China
| | - Zhongqing Yang
- Department of Urology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China
| | - Feng Zeng
- Department of Urology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Torricelli FCM. Impacted large ureteral stone: What is the best approach? Int Braz J Urol 2021; 47:71-72. [PMID: 33047913 PMCID: PMC7712679 DOI: 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2019.0638.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2020] [Accepted: 08/10/2020] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Fábio C. M. Torricelli
- Universidade de São PauloFaculdade de Medicina daDivisão de Urologia do Hospital das ClínicasSão PauloSPBrasilDivisão de Urologia do Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo. São Paulo, SP, Brasil
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Gökce Mİ, Akpinar Ç, Obaid K, Süer E, Gülpinar Ö, Bedük Y. Comparison of retrograde ureterorenoscopy (URS) and percutaneous anterograde ureteroscopy for removal of impacted upper ureteral stones >10mm in the elderly population. Int Braz J Urol 2020; 47:64-70. [PMID: 32840338 PMCID: PMC7712678 DOI: 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2019.0638] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2019] [Accepted: 01/16/2020] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE We aimed to compare the success and complication rates of the anterograde and retrograde Ureterorenoscopy (URS) for impacted upper ureteral stones in patients > 65 years of age. MATERIALS AND METHODS Data of 146 patients >65 years of age and underwent anterograde URS (n=68) in supine position or retrograde URS (n=78) for upper ureteral impacted stones>10 mm between January 2014 and September 2018 were collected prospectively. The groups were compared for success and complication rates, duration of operation, hospital stay, and ancillary procedures. RESULTS Anterograde and retrograde URS groups were similar for demographic and stone related characteristics. The success rate of the anterograde URS group was significantly higher than the retrograde URS group (97.1% vs. 78.2%, p=0.0007). The complication rates were similar for the two groups (p=0.86). Clavien grade I and II complications were observed in 3 patients in each group. The mean hemoglobin drop was 0.5 g/dL in the anterograde URS group and blood transfusion was not performed in any of the patients. The mean duration of operation was 41.2±12.5 minutes in the mini-PNL group and 59.6±15.1 minutes in the RIRS group and the difference was statistically significant (p=0.02). The median duration of hospitalization was 1 day for both groups. CONCLUSIONS Performing anterograde URS in supine position provided better success rates and similar complication rates compared to retrograde URS. Based on these results anterograde URS shall be considered as one of the primary treatment options for management of impacted upper ureteral stones in the elderly population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mehmet İlker Gökce
- Department of Urology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Çağri Akpinar
- Department of Urology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Khaled Obaid
- Department of Urology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Evren Süer
- Department of Urology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Ömer Gülpinar
- Department of Urology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Yaşar Bedük
- Department of Urology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Deng T, Chen Y, Liu B, Laguna MP, de la Rosette JJMCH, Duan X, Wu W, Zeng G. Systematic review and cumulative analysis of the managements for proximal impacted ureteral stones. World J Urol 2018; 37:1687-1701. [PMID: 30430253 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-018-2561-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2018] [Accepted: 11/03/2018] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To compare the efficacy and safety of different treatment options for the management of proximal impacted ureteral stones (PIUS). METHODS A systematic literature search using Pubmed, Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library was conducted to obtain studies concerning different managements for PIUS up to Jan 2018. Summary odds ratios (ORs), standard mean differences (SMDs) or weighted mean differences with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to compare the efficacy and safety of all included treatment methods, registered in PROSPERO under number CRD42018092745. RESULTS A total of 15 comparative studies with 1780 patients were included. Meta-analyses of final stone-free rate (SFR) favored percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) over ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URL) (OR 10.35; 95% CI 5.26-20.35; P < 0.00001), laparoscopic ureterolithotomy over URL (OR 0.11; 95% CI 0.05-0.25; P < 0.00001) and URL over extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.28-0.77; P = 0.003). As to complications, PCNL had a significantly higher blood transfusion rate (OR 7.47; 95% CI 1.3-42.85; P = 0.02) and a lower ureteral injury rate (OR 0.15; 95% CI 0.04-0.52; P = 0.003) compared with URL. It also shared a significantly lower stone-retropulsion rate (OR 0.03; 95% CI 0.01-0.15; P < 0.0001) and higher treatment costs (SMD = 2.71; 95% CI 0.71-4.70; P = 0.008) than URL. CONCLUSIONS Our meta-analysis suggested that PCNL might be the best option for PIUS owing to its higher successful rate. Complications such as hemorrhage could be decreased by the application on mini-PCNL.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tuo Deng
- Department of Urology, Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Kangda Road 1#, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, 510230, China.,Guangzhou Institute of Urology, Guangzhou, China.,Guangdong Key Laboratory of Urology, Guangzhou, China
| | - Yiwen Chen
- Department of Urology, Longgang District Central Hospital, Shenzhen, China
| | - Bing Liu
- Department of Ophthalmology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, China
| | - M Pilar Laguna
- Department of Urology, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey.,AMC University Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jean J M C H de la Rosette
- Department of Urology, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey.,AMC University Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Xiaolu Duan
- Department of Urology, Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Kangda Road 1#, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, 510230, China.,Guangzhou Institute of Urology, Guangzhou, China.,Guangdong Key Laboratory of Urology, Guangzhou, China
| | - Wenqi Wu
- Department of Urology, Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Kangda Road 1#, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, 510230, China.,Guangzhou Institute of Urology, Guangzhou, China.,Guangdong Key Laboratory of Urology, Guangzhou, China
| | - Guohua Zeng
- Department of Urology, Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Kangda Road 1#, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, 510230, China. .,Guangzhou Institute of Urology, Guangzhou, China. .,Guangdong Key Laboratory of Urology, Guangzhou, China.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Gao XS, Liao BH, Chen YT, Feng SJ, Gao R, Luo DY, Liu JM, Wang KJ. Different Tract Sizes of Miniaturized Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Versus Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Endourol 2017; 31:1101-1110. [PMID: 28950716 DOI: 10.1089/end.2017.0547] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Xiao-Shuai Gao
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology (Laboratory of Reconstructive Urology), West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, P.R. China
| | - Bang-Hua Liao
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology (Laboratory of Reconstructive Urology), West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, P.R. China
| | - Yun-Tian Chen
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology (Laboratory of Reconstructive Urology), West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, P.R. China
| | - Shi-Jian Feng
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology (Laboratory of Reconstructive Urology), West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, P.R. China
| | - Rang Gao
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology (Laboratory of Reconstructive Urology), West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, P.R. China
| | - De-Yi Luo
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology (Laboratory of Reconstructive Urology), West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, P.R. China
| | - Jia-Ming Liu
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology (Laboratory of Reconstructive Urology), West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, P.R. China
| | - Kun-Jie Wang
- Department of Urology, Institute of Urology (Laboratory of Reconstructive Urology), West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, P.R. China
| |
Collapse
|