Totally ultrasound-guided minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children: Is it safe?

Distal ureteral calculi in a patient with ileal conduit and urinary diversion treated via antegrade ureteroscopic lithotripsy: A case report

Ureteral calculi management in patients with urinary diversion is challenging for most urologists. The surgeon should consider the patient's diversion type, BMI, stone size and location, and his/her experience with the procedure. We report an 85-year-old ileal conduit diversion man presented with ureteral calculi and treated via antegrade ureteroscopic lithotripsy.

What is the best approach for pediatric kidney stones of moderate-sized between shock wave lithotripsy, ultramini percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery?

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the results of ultramini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMP), shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in pediatric patients with kidney stones 10-20 mm size.

METHODS

The files of 159 pediatric patients (36 RIRS, 39 SWL, 84 UMP) with kidney stones were reviewed retrospectively. Preoperative age, sex, stone size and location were evaluated. The three methods were compared in terms of operation and fluoroscopy duration, complications with the modified Clavien grading system, and stone-free rate (SFR) in the postoperative first month.

RESULTS

The stone burdens of the groups were similar (P = 0.102). At the end of the first month, SFR was higher in the RIRS and UMP groups compared to the SWL group (88.9%, 92.9% and 69.2%, respectively, P = 0.002). UMP had higher SFR for lower pole stones than the other two methods (P = 0.042). There was no difference in complications between the three methods (P = 0.758).

CONCLUSION

SFR was similar for all three methods in all localizations, apart from lower pole stones. UMP had higher SFR for lower pole stones than the other two methods. There was no difference in terms of complications between the three methods.