Day-surgery percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a gap between inspiring results and the reality

  • ShiKe Zhang
  • WeiZhou Wu
  • YaPeng Huang
  • WenQi WuEmail author
Letter To The Editor


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Zeng G, Mai Z, Xia S et al (2017) Prevalence of kidney stones in China: an ultrasonography based cross-sectional study. BJU Int 120(1):109–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lieske J, Rule A, Krambeck A et al (2014) Stone composition as a function of age and sex. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 9(12):2141–2146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jones P, Bennett G, Dosis A et al (2018) Safety and efficacy of day-case percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review from European Society of Uro-technology. Eur Urol Focus. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wu X, Zhao Z, Sun H et al (2019) Day-surgery percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a high-volume center retrospective experience. World J Urol. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zhao Z, Sun H, Wu X et al (2019) Evaluation of day-care versus inpatient mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a propensity score-matching study. Urolithiasis. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tepeler A, Karatag T, Tok A et al (2016) Factors affecting hospital readmission and rehospitalization following percutaneous nephrolithotomy. World J Urol 34(1):69–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jakobsson J (2019) Recovery and discharge criteria after ambulatory anesthesia: can we improve them? Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Urology and Guangdong Key Laboratory of UrologyThe First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical UniversityGuangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations