Miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery in the treatment of renal stones with a diameter <15 mm: A 3-year open-label prospective study

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stones: a Cochrane Review

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) vs retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the treatment of renal stones in adults.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, trials registries, other sources of the grey literature, and conference proceedings up to 23 March 2023. We applied no restrictions on publication language or status. Screening, data extraction, risk-of-bias assessment, and certainty of evidence (CoE) rating using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach were done in duplicate by two independent reviewers. This co-publication focuses on the primary outcomes of this review only.

RESULTS

We included 42 trials that met the inclusion criteria. Stone-free rate (SFR): PCNL may improve SFRs (risk ratio [RR] 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.18; I2 = 71%; 39 studies, 4088 participants; low CoE). Major complications: PCNL probably has little to no effect on major complications (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.59-1.25; I2 = 15%; 34 studies, 3649; participants; moderate CoE) compared to RIRS. Need for secondary interventions: PCNL may reduce the need for secondary interventions (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.17-0.55; I2 = 61%; 21 studies, 2005 participants; low CoE) compared to RIRS.

CONCLUSION

Despite shortcomings in most studies that lowered our certainty in the estimates of effect to mostly very low or low, we found that PCNL may improve SFRs and reduce the need for secondary interventions while not impacting major complications. Ureteric stricture rates may be similar compared to RIRS. We expect the findings of this review to be helpful for shared decision-making about management choices for individuals with renal stones.

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal stones in adults

BACKGROUND

Kidney stones (also called renal stones) can be a source of pain, obstruction, and infection. Depending on size, location, composition, and other patient factors, the treatment of kidney stones can involve observation, shock wave lithotripsy, retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS; i.e. ureteroscopic approaches), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), or a combination of these approaches.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) versus retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the treatment of renal stones in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and two trials registries up to 23 March 2023. We applied no restrictions on publication language or status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials that evaluated PCNL (grouped by access size in French gauge [Fr] into three groups: ≥ 24 Fr [standard PCNL], 15-23 Fr [mini-PCNL and minimally invasive PCNL], and < 15 Fr [ultra-mini-, mini-micro-, super-mini-, and micro-PCNL]) versus RIRS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data from the included studies. Our primary outcomes were stone-free rate, major complications, and need for secondary interventions. Our main secondary outcomes were unplanned medical visits to emergency/urgent care or outpatient clinic, length of hospital stay, ureteral stricture or injury, and quality of life. We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model. We rated the certainty of evidence using GRADE criteria. We adopted a minimally contextualized approach with predefined thresholds for minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 42 trials assessing the effects of PCNL versus RIRS in 4571 randomized participants. Twenty-two studies were published as full-text articles, and 20 were published as abstract proceedings. The average size of stones ranged from 10.1 mm to 39.1 mm. Most studies did not report sources of funding or conflicts of interest. The main results for the most important outcomes are summarized below. Stone-free rate PCNL compared with RIRS may improve stone-free rates (risk ratio [RR] 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08 to 1.18; I2 = 71%; 39 studies, 4088 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on 770 participants per 1000 being stone-free with RIRS, this corresponds to 100 more (62 more to 139 more) stone-free participants per 1000 with PCNL (an absolute difference of 10%, where the predefined MCID was 5%). Major complications PCNL compared with RIRS probably has little or no effect on major complications (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.25; I2 = 15%; 34 studies, 3649 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on 31 complications in the RIRS group, this corresponds to six fewer (13 fewer to six more) major complications per 1000 with PCNL (an absolute difference of 0.6%, where the predefined MCID was 2%). Need for secondary interventions PCNL compared with RIRS may reduce the need for secondary interventions (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.55; I2 = 61%; 21 studies, 2005 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on 222 secondary interventions in the RIRS group, this corresponds to 153 fewer (185 fewer to 100 fewer) secondary interventions per 1000 with PCNL (an absolute difference of 15.3%, where the predefined MCID was 5%). Unplanned medical visits No studies reported unplanned medical visits. Length of hospital stay PCNL compared with RIRS may extend length of hospital stay (mean difference 1.04 days more, 95% CI 0.27 more to 1.81 more; I2 = 100%; 26 studies, 2804 participants; low-certainty evidence). This effect size is greater than the predefined MCID of one day. Ureteral stricture or injury PCNL compared with RIRS may have little or no effect on the occurrence of ureteral strictures (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.39 to 2.21; I2 = 0%; 13 studies, 1574 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on 14 ureteral strictures in the RIRS group, this corresponds to one fewer (nine fewer to 17 more) ureteral strictures per 1000 with PCNL (an absolute difference of 0.1%, where the predefined MCID was 2%). Quality of life No studies reported quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on a large body of evidence from 42 trials, we found that PCNL compared with RIRS may improve stone-free rates and may reduce the need for secondary interventions, but probably has little or no effect on major complications. PCNL compared with RIRS may have little or no effect on ureteral stricture rates and may increase length of hospital stay. We found no evidence on unplanned medical visits or participant quality of life. Because of the considerable shortcomings of the included trials, the evidence for most outcomes was of low certainty. Access size for PCNL was less than 24 Fr in most studies that provided this information. We expect the findings of this review to be helpful for shared decision-making about management choices for individuals with renal stones.

Infectious complications of endourological treatment of kidney stones: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

Endourological treatment is associated with a risk of postoperative febrile urinary tract infections and sepsis. The aim of this study was to review the reported rate of infectious complications in relation to the type and modality of the endourologic procedure.

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Two electronic databases (PubMed and EMBASE) were searched. Out of 243 articles retrieved we included 49 studies after full-text evaluation.

RESULTS

Random-effects meta-analysis demonstrated that retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) were associated with not significantly different odds of getting fever (OR = 1.54, 95% CI: 0.99 to 2.39; p = 0.06) or sepsis (OR = 1.52, 95% CI: 0.37 to 6.20, p = 0.56). The odds of getting fever were not significantly different for mini PCNL compared to standard PCNL (OR = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.85 to 1.44; p = 0.45) and for tubeless PCNL compared to standard PCNL (OR = 1.34 95% CI: 0.61 to 2.91, p = 0.47). However, the odds for fever after PCNL with suctioning sheath were lower than the corresponding odds for standard PCNL (OR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.20 to 0.70, p = 0.002). The odds of getting fever after PCNL with perioperative prophylaxis were not different from the corresponding odds after PCNL with perioperative prophylaxis plus a short oral antibiotic course (before or after the procedure) (OR = 1.31, 95% CI: 0.71 to 2.39, p = 0.38).

CONCLUSIONS

The type of endourological procedure does not appear to be decisive in the onset of infectious complications, although the prevention of high intrarenal pressure during the procedure could be crucial in defining the risk of infectious complications.   on behalf of U-merge Ltd. (Urology for emerging countries), London-Athens-Dubai.

Miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery in the treatment of lower pole renal stones

OBJECTIVES

Miniaturization of percutaneous nephrolithotomy techniques have led to their increased consideration for lower pole renal stones that can prove more challenging to reach using retrograde intrarenal surgery. The objectives of the present study were to evaluate and compare the outcomes of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (miniPCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the treatment of lower pole renal stones.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was performed in two academic urology departments between January 2016 and June 2019. Patients presenting with one or multiple stones of the lower calyx and/or renal pelvis, between 10 and 40mm based on CT-scan treated by miniPCNL or RIRS were included.

RESULTS

In all, 115 miniPCNL and 118 RIRS procedures were included. The rate of patients with no significant residual fragment (stone free rate) after the first procedure was higher in the miniPCNL group (69% vs. 52% P=0.01), especially for stones>20mm (63% vs. 24% respectively, P<0.001) and stones with a density≥1000HU (69% vs. 42% respectively, P=0.009). The higher stone free rate of miniPCNL was confirmed in multivariate analysis, adjusting for stone size and number of stones, OR 4.02 (95% CI 2.08-8.11, P<0.0001). The overall postoperative complication rate was higher in the miniPCNL group than in the RIRS group (23% vs. 11%, P=0.01). A second intervention for the treatment of residual fragments was necessary for 9.6% of patients in the miniPCNL group versus 30.5% of patients in the RIRS group (P<0.001). Pre-stenting rate and duration of ureteral drainage (2 [1-8] vs. 25 days [7-37], P<0.001) were lower in the miniPCNL group.

CONCLUSIONS

The stone free rate was higher after miniPCNL, especially for stones>20mm and with a density>1000 HU, but was associated with a higher risk of postoperative complications and a longer hospital stay. RIRS resulted in fewer complications at the cost of a higher retreatment rate and longer ureteral stenting.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Minimally invasive versus standard endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery for renal stones: a retrospective pilot study analysis

PURPOSE

The effect of combining miniaturization with endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery (ECIRS) is unclear. Thus, we compared the treatment outcomes between minimally invasive ECIRS (mini-ECIRS) using 16.5 Fr percutaneous access sheath and standard ECIRS using 24 Fr access sheath for renal stones MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients who underwent single session mini or standard-ECIRS in the modified Valdivia position for renal stones between April 2009 and May 2016. To adjust for patient characteristics, 77 pairs were matched using preoperative parameters including age, sex, history of febrile urinary tract infection (UTI), stone surface area, number of involved calyces, and staghorn calculi.

RESULTS

The stone free rate (SFR) was similar between mini and standard ECIRS according to non-contrast computed tomography (61.1% vs. 52.0%, p = 0.388). The rate of perioperative complications exceeding grade 2 based on the Clavien-Dindo classification was similar in both groups (19.5% vs. 26.0%, p = 0.442). Severe complications exceeding grade 3 were also similar in both groups (2.6% vs. 3.9%, p > 0.99). Two cases of septic shock were noted in each group. Although there was no difference regarding bleeding-related complications (2.6% vs. 6.5%, p = 0.442), pseudoaneurysm or blood transfusion was not observed in the mini-ECIRS group. Pain visual analog scale values in the perioperative period were lower in the mini-ECIRS group (1.34 ± 1.08 vs. 1.69 ± 1.23, p = 0.062).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that, compared to standard ECIRS, mini-ECIRS maintained SFR without increasing perioperative complications, tended to reduce postoperative pain and had a potential to reduce bleeding-related complications. This report suggests the advantages of ECIRS miniaturization for renal stones.

Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery in surgical management of upper urinary stones - A systematic review with meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to retrospectively assess the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) versus retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in the management of upper urinary stones.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review of articles that investigated the efficacy and safety of MPCNL and RIRS was conducted by systematically searching PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library in March 2019. Two reviewers searched the literature, independently extracted the data and evaluated the quality of the data according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. A meta-analysis was performed by using Review Manager 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 725 patients with upper urinary stones were analysed based on the inclusion criteria. While MPCNL has a better clinical efficacy than RIRS with respect to the stone-free rate (SFR) [RR = 1.11, 95% CI (1.05-1.17), p = 0.0005], MPCNL has a higher incidence of haematoma [RR = 3.09, 95% CI (1.44-6.66), p = 0.004] and longer hospitalization time [MD = 0.89 day, 95% CI (0.07-1.72), p = 0.04]. In addition, no significant difference in operative time [MD = 2.46 min, 95% CI (-17.99 to 22.92), p = 0.81] and postoperative pain score [MD = 0.74, 95% CI (-0.45 to 1.94), p = 0.22] were observed between the two methods. Overall, the evidence was insufficient to suggest a statistically significant difference in the adverse event profile for MPCNL compared with RIRS.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that MPCNL is an effective method for treating upper urinary stones, especially lower calyceal stones that are 1-2 cm in size. Compared to RIRS, MPCNL is associated with a longer hospital stay time and a higher incidence of haematoma. In addition, both methods have proven to be safe. Nevertheless, the findings should be further confirmed through well-designed prospective RCTs with a larger patient series.