Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Retrospective study of single-use digital flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy versus miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy for 1.5–2.5cm lower pole renal stones

  • Urology - Original Paper
  • Published:
International Urology and Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical information of patients with 1.5–2.5 cm lower pole renal stones treated by single-use digital flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (fURS) and miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) in affiliated hospital of the Nantong University from January 2020 to December 2022. To compare the safety and efficacy of single-use fURS and MPCNL in the treatment from 1.5cm to 2.5cm lower pole renal stones.

Methods

Clinical information of 141 patients were collected and divided into single-use fURS group and MPCNL group according to their treatment methods, including 83 patients in the single-use fURS group and 58 patients in the MPCNL group. Baseline data, data on the clinical characteristics of stones, laboratory examination data, operation time, and postoperative data of the two groups were collected. Statistical analysis was made on the collected data to analyze the differences and causes between the two groups of patients.

Results

There was no significant difference in the baseline data and preoperative clinical features of 141 patients between the two groups (P > 0.05). In comparison of postoperative serum indexes, the drop values of hemoglobin and creatinine in single-use fURS group were lower than those in MPCNL group, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The stone free rate was higher in the MPCNL group than in the single-use fURS group on the first day after surgery. At the 1st month after surgery, the two groups were similar. At 3rd month after surgery, the single-use fURS group was slightly higher than the MPCNL group, with no statistical significance (P > 0.05). The total complication rate in single-use fURS group was slightly lower than that in MPCNL group, but there was no statistical significance (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

Single-use fURS has similar safety and efficacy to MPCNL in the treatment of 1.5–2.5cm lower pole renal stones. Single-use fURS may be a new option for the treatment of these stones.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data will be provided upon request.

Abbreviations

Single-use fURS:

Single-use digital flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy

MPCNL:

Miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy

IPA:

Infundibular pelvic angle

SFR:

Stone-free rate

ESWL:

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy

PCNL:

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy

FURL:

Flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy

UMP:

Ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy

SMP:

Channel and super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy

BMI:

Body mass index

CT:

Computed tomography

RIRS:

Retroactive intrarenal surgery

References

  1. Yang B, Li J, Liu J et al (2018) Safe surgical treatment of peripelvic renal cyst combined with renal calculi by percutaneous nephroscopy. Clin Case Rep 6(2):370–375. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccr3.1302

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Kallidonis P, Ntasiotis P, Somani B et al (2020) Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing percutaneous nephrolithotomy, retrograde intrarenal surgery and shock wave lithotripsy for lower pole renal stones less than 2 cm in maximum diameter. J Urol 204(3):427–433. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000001013

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Danilovic A (2020) Editorial comment: role of pelvicalyceal anatomy in the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for lower pole stones: outcomes with a systematic review of literature. Int Braz J Urol 46(2):273–274. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2020.02.05

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Yuri P, Hariwibowo R, Soeroharjo I et al (2018) Meta-analysis of Optimal Management of Lower Pole Stone of 10–20 mm: Flexible Ureteroscopy (FURS) versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) versus Percutaneus Nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Acta Med Indones 50(1):18–25

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Martov AG, Ergakov DV, Andronov AS et al (2017) Solitary stones of the lower renal calyx: how to treat? Urologiia 2:28–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fernström I, Johansson B (1976) Percutaneous pyelolithotomy. A new extraction technique. Scand J Urol Nephrol 10(3):257–259

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Li M-M, Yang H-M, Liu X-M, Qi H-G, Weng G-B (2018) Retrograde intrarenal surgery vs miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy to treat lower pole renal stones 1.5–2.5 cm in diameter. World J Clin Cases 6(15):931–935. https://doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v6.i15.931

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Zeng J, Zhang L, Chen X, He H, Li X (2022) The treatment option for calyceal diverticulum stones: flexible ureteroscopy lithotripsy (FURL) or all-seeing needle-assisted percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL)? Urolithiasis 50(6):743–749. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-022-01353-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chen Y, Wen Y, Yu Q, Duan X, Wu W, Zeng G (2020) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy in the treatment of upper urinary tract stones: a meta-analysis comparing clinical efficacy and safety. BMC Urol 20(1):109. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-020-00677-4

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Zhang H, Hong TY, Li G et al (2019) Comparison of the efficacy of ultra-mini PCNL, flexible ureteroscopy, and shock wave lithotripsy on the treatment of 1–2 cm lower pole renal calculi. Urol Int 102(2):153–159. https://doi.org/10.1159/000493508

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ozgor F, Sahan M, Yanaral F, Savun M, Sarilar O (2018) Flexible ureterorenoscopy is associated with less stone recurrence rates over Shockwave lithotripsy in the management of 10–20 millimeter lower pole renal stone: medium follow-up results. Int Braz J Urol 44(2):314–322. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2017.0483

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Scotland KB, Chan JYH, Chew BH (2019) Single-use flexible ureteroscopes: how do they compare with reusable ureteroscopes? J Endourol 33(2):71–78. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2018.0785

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Göger YE, Özkent MS, Kılınç MT et al (2021) Efficiency of retrograde intrarenal surgery in lower pole stones: disposable flexible ureterorenoscope or reusable flexible ureterorenoscope? World J Urol 39(9):3643–3650. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-021-03656-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mazzucchi E, Berto FCG, Denstedt J et al (2022) Treatment of renal lower pole stones: an update. Int Braz J Urol 48(1):165–174. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2020.1023

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Riley JM, Stearman L, Troxel S (2009) Retrograde ureteroscopy for renal stones larger than 2.5 cm. J Endourol 23(9):1395–1398. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2009.0391

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Giulioni C, Castellani D, Somani BK et al (2023) The efficacy of retrograde intra-renal surgery (RIRS) for lower pole stones: results from 2946 patients. World J Urol 41(5):1407–1413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-023-04363-6

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Scales CD, Smith AC, Hanley JM, Saigal CS (2012) Prevalence of kidney stones in the United States. Eur Urol 62(1):160–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.03.052

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Stamatelou KK, Francis ME, Jones CA, Nyberg LM, Curhan GC (2003) Time trends in reported prevalence of kidney stones in the United States: 1976–1994. Kidney Int 63(5):1817–1823

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Jinhua D, Wanlin D (2022) Retrospective analysis of stone basket combined with flexible ureteroscope holmium laser lithotripsy in the treatment of lower calyceal stones. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 26(10):3430–3436. https://doi.org/10.26355/eurrev_202205_28836

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Yang E, Jing S, Niu Y et al (2021) Single-use digital flexible ureteroscopes as a safe and effective choice for the treatment of lower pole renal stones: secondary analysis of a randomized-controlled trial. J Endourol 35(12):1773–1778. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2021.0170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Huang F, Zhang X, Cui Y et al (2021) Single-use vs. Reusable digital flexible ureteroscope to treat upper urinary calculi: a propensity-score matching analysis. Front Surg 8:778157. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2021.778157

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Dorantes-Carrillo LA, Basulto-Martínez M, Suárez-Ibarrola R et al (2022) Retrograde intrarenal surgery versus miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy for kidney stones >1cm: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Eur Urol Focus 8(1):259–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2021.02.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kyriazis I, Panagopoulos V, Kallidonis P, Özsoy M, Vasilas M, Liatsikos E (2015) Complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. World J Urol 33(8):1069–1077. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-014-1400-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This article was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [grant number: 81771571] and Postgraduate Research & Practice Innovation Program of Jiangsu Province ( SJCX23_1792), The funder had no role in study design, analysis, interpretation of data, the writing of the manuscript and the decision to submit the article for publication.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Wei Meng, Huajun Zhang and Jiahao Wang have contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Medical School of Nantong University, Nantong, 226001, China

    Wei Meng, Bo Chen, Zhaosheng Jiang, Limin Ma & Yangbo Guan

  2. Department of Urology, The Affiliated Wuxi People’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Wuxi, 214023, China

    Jiahao Wang

  3. Dalian Medical University, Dalian, 116000, China

    Huajun Zhang

Authors
  1. Wei Meng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Huajun Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jiahao Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bo Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Zhaosheng Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Limin Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Yangbo Guan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Limin Ma or Yangbo Guan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest for the publication of this study.

Ethical approval

The whole study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University and the informed consent of enrolled patients was obtained. Besides, the study is also in line with the Helsinki Declaration.

Consent to participant

The whole study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University and the informed consent of enrolled patients was obtained. Besides, the study is also in line with the Helsinki Declaration.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Meng, W., Zhang, H., Wang, J. et al. Retrospective study of single-use digital flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy versus miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy for 1.5–2.5cm lower pole renal stones. Int Urol Nephrol 56, 55–62 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-023-03771-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-023-03771-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation