Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of super-mini versus mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the treatment of upper urinary tract stones in children: a single centre experience

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Pediatric Surgery International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The efficacy and safety of super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SMP, 14 Fr) was compared with mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL, 16 Fr) for the treatment of upper urinary tract stones in children (< 14 years old).

Methods

Clinical data of 133 paediatric patients with upper urinary tract stones treated with SMP or MPCNL between May 2012 and May 2019 were retrospectively analysed. The patients were divided into the SMP and MPCNL groups. Age, height, weight, stone size, operation time, stone-free rate (SFR), postoperative complications, tubeless rate, and length of postoperative hospital stay (LOS) were compared.

Results

There were 66 patients (49.6%) in the SMP and 67 patients (50.4%) in the MPCNL group. No significant difference in the median age, weight, height and operation time, and SFR existed between the patients of the two groups. Larger stones were removed via SMP compared to those removed with MPCNL (2.0 vs. 1.5 cm, P = 0.001). LOS for SMP patients was significantly lower than that for the MPCNL patients (2 and 6 days, respectively, P < 0.0001). The tubeless rate for SMP was significantly higher than that for MPCNL (100% vs. 0%, P < 0.0001). Total complication rate of MPCNL was significantly higher than that of SMP (25.3% vs. 7.5%, P = 0.006). No patient required blood transfusion, and septicaemia, and other serious complications did not occur.

Conclusion

SMP is more effective than MPCNL for treating middle-sized upper urinary tract stones in children, and is associated with a shorter LOS and a higher tubeless rate.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

References

  1. Türk C, Petřík A, Sarica K, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, Straub M, Knoll T (2016) EAU guidelines on interventional treatment for urolithiasis. Eur Urol 69:475–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.041

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lahme S (2006) Shockwave lithotripsy and endourological stone treatment in children. Urol Res 34:112–117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-005-0021-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hesse A, Kruse R, Geilenkeuser WJ, Schmidt M (2005) Quality control in urinary stone analysis: results of 44 ring trials (1980–2001). Clin Chem Lab Med 43:298–303. https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2005.051

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Srisubat A, Potisat S, Lojanapiwat B, Setthawong V, Laopaiboon M (2014) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery RIRS. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007044.pub3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Resorlu B, Oguz U, Resorlu EB, Oztuna D, Unsal A (2012) The impact of pelvicaliceal anatomy on the success of retrograde intrarenal surgery in patients with lower pole renal stones. Urology 79:61–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2011.06.031.Jan:61--66

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Xiao B, Zhang X, Hu WG, Chen S, Li YH, Tang YZ, Liu YB, Li JX (2015) Mini–percutaneous nephrolithotomy under total ultrasonography in patients aged less than 3 years: A single–center initial experience from China. Chin Med J 128:1596–1600. https://doi.org/10.4103/0366-6999.158312

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Silay MS, Tepeler A, Atis G, Sancaktutar AA, Piskin M, Gurbuz C, Penbegul N, Ozturk A, Caskurlu T, Armagan A (2013) Initial report of microperc in the treatment of pediatric nephrothiasis. J Pediatr Surg 48:1578–1583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2013.06.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dede O, Sancaktutar AA, Dağguli M et al (2015) 0ct Ultra–mini–percutaneous nephrolithotomy in pediatric nephrolithiasis:both low pressure and high efficiency. J Pediatr Urol 11(253):e1–e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2015.03.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Liu Y, Wu W, Tuerxun A, Liu Y, Simayi A, Huang J, Batuer A, Zhou Y, Luo J, Zhong W, Zhao Z, Zhu W, Zeng G (2017) Super–mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of pediatric nephrolithiasis: evaluation of the initial results. J Endourol. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2016.0572

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Liu Y, AlSmadi J, Zhu W, Liu Y, Wu W, Fan J, Lan Y, Lam W, Zhong W, Zeng G (2018) Comparison of super–mini PCNL (SMP) versus Miniperc for stones larger than 2 cm: a propensity score–matching study. World J Urol 36:955–961. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2197-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Zhao Z, Tuerxu A, Liu Y, Wu W, Simayi A, Zhong W, Chen W, Batuer A, Zeng G (2017) Super-mini PCNL (SMP): material, indications, technique, advantages and results. Arch Esp Urol 70(1):211–216

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Zeng G, Wan S, Zhao Z, Zhu J, Tuerxun A, Song C, Zhong L, Liu M, Xu K, Li H, Jiang Z, Khadgi S, Pal SK, Liu J, Zhang G, Liu Y, Wu W, Chen W, Sarica K (2016) Super–mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SMP): a new concept in technique and instrumentation. BJU Int 117:655–661. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13242

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Zeng G, Zhu W, Liu Y, Fan J, Zhao Z, Cai C (2017) The new generation super–mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SMP) system:a step–by–step guide. BJU Int 120:735–738. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13955

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hernandez JD, Ellison JS, Lendvay TS (2015) Current trends, evaluation, and management of pediatric nephrolithiasis. JAMA Pediatr 169:964–970. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2015.1419

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Salerno A, Nappo SG, Matarazzo E, De Dominicis M, Caione P (2013) Treatment of pediatric renal stones in a Western country: a changing pattern. J Pediatr Surg 48:835–839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2012.09.058

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Abu Ghazaleh LA, Shunaigat AN, Budair Z (2011) Retrograde intrarenal lithotripsy for small renal stones in prepubertal children. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl 22:492–496

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bandi G, Best SL, Nakada SY (2008) Current practice patterns in the management of upper urinary tract calculi in the north central United States. J Endourol 22:631–636. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2007.0186

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Celik H, Camtosun A, Altintas R, Tasdemir C (2016) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children with pediatric and adult–sized instruments. J Pediatr Urol 12:399.e1-399.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2016.04.053

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Bilen CY, Koçak B, Kitirci G, Ozkaya O, Sarikaya S (2007) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children: lessons learned in 5 years at a single institution. J Urol 177:1867–1871. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.01.052

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Knoll T, Wezel F, Michel MS, Honeck P, Wendt-Nordahl G (2010) Do patients benefit from miniaturized tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy? A comparative prospective study. J Endourol 24:1075–1079. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2010.0111

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Giusti G, Piccinelli A, Taverna G, Benetti A, Pasini L, Corinti M, Teppa A, Zandegiacomo de Zorzi S, Graziotti P (2007) Miniperc? No, thank you! Eur Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2006.07.047

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Guohua Z, Wen Z, Xun L, Wenzhong C, Yongzhong H, Zhaohui H, Ming L, Kaijun W (2007) The influence of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy on renal pelvic pressure in vivo. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 17:307–310. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLE.0b013e31806e61f4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Istanbulluoglu MO, Ozturk B, Gonen M, Cicek T, Ozkardes H (2009) Effectiveness of totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy in selected patients: a prospective randomized study. Int Urol Nephrol 41:541–545. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-008-9517-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

None.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Urology Center, People’s Hospital of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, Urumqi, China

    Abulizi Simayi, Peng Lei, Talaiti Tayier, Aihemaiti Aimaier, Zhang Xiao’an & Yalikun Alimu

Authors
  1. Abulizi Simayi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peng Lei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Talaiti Tayier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Aihemaiti Aimaier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Zhang Xiao’an
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yalikun Alimu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

LP, YA: project development. AA, ZX: data collection or management. TT, AA: data analysis. AS, LP: manuscript writing. YA: manuscript editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peng Lei.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

The institutional review committee of the People's Hospital of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region approved the study.

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from the parents of all the patients.

Consent for publication

All of authors were consented.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Simayi, A., Lei, P., Tayier, T. et al. Comparison of super-mini versus mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the treatment of upper urinary tract stones in children: a single centre experience. Pediatr Surg Int 37, 1141–1146 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-021-04925-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-021-04925-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation