A Fast Lexicographic Algorithm for Association Rule Mining in Web Applications

Ming-Yen Lin,Suh-Yin Lee

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Comparison of safety and efficacy of laparoscopic pyelolithotomy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with large renal pelvic stones: a meta-analysis.

Xuefang Rui,Haiyi Hu,Yanlan Yu,Shicheng Yu,Zhigen Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jim-2015-000053

2016-01-01

Journal of Investigative Medicine

Abstract:To compare percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and laparoscopic pyelolithotomy (LP) for surgical management for large (>2cm) renal stones. We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases until March 11, 2015, using the following search terms: renalpelvic stone, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, laparoscopic pyelolithotomy. Randomized controlled and prospective and retrospective two-armed studies were included. Sensitivity analysis and assessment of the quality of the included studies and publication bias were performed. Nine studies were included in the study with a patient population of 622. The studies were homogeneous with respect to the primary end point of stone-free rate, but were heterogeneous with respect to operation time, length of hospital stay, and blood loss. A higher percentage of patients who received LP remained stone-free following surgery compared with patients who were treated with PCNL (p=0.001). However, the mean operation time was longer for patients with LP than for those treated with PCNL (p=0.002). There was no difference between procedures with regard to length of hospital stay or blood loss (p0.071). Sensitivity and quality analysis indicated that the data are reliable and the included studies are of good quality. No publication bias was observed. The study suggests that both procedures are effective and safe for removing large renal stones. However, LP may be more efficacious than PCNL in treating large kidney stones.
A Comparative Study to Analyze the Efficacy and Safety of Flexible Ureteroscopy Combined with Holmium Laser Lithotripsy for Residual Calculi after Percutaneous Nephrolithotripsy

Gang Xu,Jiaming Wen,Zhongyi Li,Zhewei Zhang,Xiuqing Gong,Jimin Chen,Chuanjun Du

2015-01-01

Abstract:A certain proportion of patients with initial Percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PCNL) management require ancillary procedures to increase the stone-free rate. In this study, we aim to analyze the efficacy and safety of flexible ureteroscopy combined with holmium laser lithotripsy (F-UL) for treatment of residual calculi after PCNL by comparison with extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL). Total of 96 patients with residual renal calculi (4 mm to 20 mm) after PCNL was enrolled from May 2010 to March 2013. They were randomly divided into two groups: US Group: patients were treated with F-UL; SWL Group: patients were treated with SWL. Follow-up was made one month and three months after treatment. The mean residual stone size after PCNL was 12.4 ± 4.3 mm in US group compared with 11.9 ± 4.5 in SWL group. The stone-free rate was 84.7% one month after surgical procedure in US group, this rate increased to 91.3% in the third months, while the stone-free rate in SWL group is 64.6% one month after treatment and 72.9% in the third month. For residual stone in lower calyx, the stone-free rate three month after treatment was 90.4% in US group compared to 65.2% in SWL group (P < 0.05). The overall complication rate was low in both groups, no severe complication was found. Both F-UL and SWL are safe and effective methods for residual calculi after PCNL, without severe complications. F-UL provided significantly higher stone-free rate compared with SWL, especially for low-pole calculi.
Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Versus Endoscopic Combined Intrarenal Surgery with Flexible Ureteroscope for Partial Staghorn Calculi: A Randomised Controlled Trial

Jiaming Wen,Gang Xu,Chuanjun Du,Bohan Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.02.056

2016-01-01

International Journal of Surgery

Abstract:Background: To compare the efficacy and safety of simultaneous percutaneous nephrolithotomy combined with flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy in Galdakao-Modified Supine Valdivia position (GMSV) with minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) for partial staghorn calculi. Methods: 67 patients with partial staghorn calculi were randomly divided into two groups. In MPCNL Group, conventional MPCNL was performed in the prone position. In the other group, simultaneous combined MPCNL and flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (Endoscopic Combined Intra-Renal Surgery, ECIRS) serves as single session treatment in the GMSV position (ECIRS Group). Demographic, clinical characteristic, perioperative complications and stone free rate (SFR) were recorded. Results: No significant difference was detected between two groups concerning the age, body mass index, hydronephrosis, stone burden and location. The mean operative time was 105.33 +/- 30.28 min in ECIRS group, which is longer (p = 0.002) than MPCNL group (83.58 +/- 24.37 min). The one-step SFR was significantly higher (p = 0.007) in the ECIRS group compared to MPCNL group (87.88% vs 58.82%). The mean blood loss was 77.21 +/- 41.21 ml for ECIRS group and 86.43 +/- 35.61 ml for MPCNL group (p = 0.330). Overall, complication rate is low in both groups. No statistical difference was found in regards to the clinical complications between the two groups (p = 0.409). After the ancillary treatments, the final SFR was 96.97% in ECIRS group and 91.18% in MPCNL group (p = 0.628). Conclusion: Simultaneous combined MPCNL and flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy is an effective and safe treatment for partial staghorn calculi, with significantly higher one-step SFR when compared to conventional MPCNL monotherapy, without additional procedure-related complications. (C) 2016 IJS Publishing Group Limited. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Efficacy and safety of surgical treatment for 1-2 cm sized lower pole of renal stone: network meta-analysis of randomized control trials

Atalel Fentahun Awedew,Yakob Sheiferawe Seman,Dawit Zerihun Yalew,Yohannes Chemere Wondmeneh,Wassie Almaw Yigzaw

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-023-01454-2

2023-05-15

Urolithiasis

Abstract:The management of medium-sized (1-2 cm) lower poles renal stone has been a contentious topic for endourologists. There are limited evidences to answer the best management options for medium-sized lower pole renal stone. This network meta-analysis provided high-level evidences on efficacy and safety of profile of PCNL, Mini-PCNL, Ultra-PCNL, RIRS, Micro-PCNL, SWL for management of medium-sized lower pole renal stone. Systemic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized control trials was conducted. The PICOS (Population, Interventions, Comparison, Outcomes, and Study) approach was used to look for relevant studies. Searches were conducted at major electronic databases like Medline via PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, SCOPUS, ScienceDirect, Cochrane library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov to find relevant articles from the inception to April 19, 2023. Fourteen randomized control trials involving 2194 patients were among these studies that met the eligibility criteria. Pooled SFR was Mini-PNCL 98% (95% CI 96-99%), Ultara-PCNL 96% (95% CI 93-98%), RIRS 90% (95% CI 88-92%), PCNL 88% (95% CI 85-92%), Micro-PCNL 77% (61-88%) and SWL 69% (95% CI 65-74%). Mini-PCNL provided a statistically significant higher SFR compared to RIRS (RR = 2.43 91.52; 3.89)), Micro-PCNL (RR = 3.19 (1.09; 9.38)), and SWL (RR = 6.17 (3.65; 10.44)), but there was no statistical significance with standard PCNL (RR = 1.06 (0.52; 2.16)) and Ultra-PCNL (RR = 1.37 (0.75; 2.51)) for management of medium-sized lower pole renal stone. The order of SUCRA values for complication rate was as follows: PCNL(90%), Micro-PCNL(70%), Mini-PCNL(50%), Ultra-PCNL(50%), RIRS(40%), and SWL(10%). The current pooled evidence from fourteen randomized control trials revealed that Mini-PCNL, Ultra-PCNL, and standard PCNL are likely the best treatments for medium-sized lower poles when SFR over a short period of minimal session is a priority. These treatment options have a higher rate of complications, longer hospital stays, and acceptable operations time. RIRS and SWL treatment have acceptable efficacy stone-free rate with low complication rate, short hospital stays, and operation time. These treatment option would be the best fit for solitary kidney, coagulopathy, and comorbidity.
Efficacy and safety of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery in the treatment of upper urinary tract stones (> 1 cm): a systematic review and meta-analysis of 18 randomized controlled trials

Yang Liu,Huimin Zhang,Zhi Wen,Yu Jiang,Jing Huang,Chongjian Wang,Caixia Chen,Jiahao Wang,Erhao Bao,Xuesong Yang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-023-01341-3

2023-10-24

Abstract:Background: The advantages and disadvantages of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) for treatment of upper urinary tract calculi have not been conclusively determined. Methods: In this meta-analysis, We comprehensively evaluated the performance of the two surgical approaches in treatment of upper urinary calculi. We searched the Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane and Web of science databases for randomized controlled trial (RCT) articles on RIRS and mPCNL upto December 2022. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers and subjected to the meta-analysis using the Stata 15.1 software (StataSE, USA). Results: A total of 18 eligible RCTs involving 1733 patients were included in this study. The meta-analysis revealed that mPCNL of 1-2 cm or 2-3 cm stones had a higher stone clearance rate (RR:1.08, 95%CI (1.03, 1.14), p = 0.002) and shorter operation time (WMD : -10.85 min, 95%CI (-16.76, -4.94), p<0.001). However, it was associated with more hospital stay time (WMD :1.01 day, 95%CI(0.53, 1.5), p<0.001), hemoglobin drops (WMD :0.27 g/dl, 95%CI (0.14, 0.41), p<0.001), blood transfusion rate (RR:5.04, 95%CI(1.62, 15.65), p = 0.005), pain visual analogue score (WMD:0.75, 95%CI (0.04, 1.46), p = 0.037), hospital costs (SMD :-0.97, 95%CI (-1.19, -0.76), p<0.001) and major complications (RR:1.89, 95%CI(1.01, 3.53), p = 0.045). Conclusion: Therefore, in terms of surgical effects and operation time, mPCNL is superior to RIRS, but is inferior with regards to other perioperative parameters. These factors should be fully considered in clinical decision making.
Efficacy and safety of various endosurgical procedures for management of large renal stone: a systemic review and network meta-analysis of randomised control trials

Atalel Fentahun Awedew,Chalachew Tenna Alemu,Dawit Zerihun Yalew

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-023-01459-x

2023-06-08

Urolithiasis

Abstract:Urolithiasis is the most common benign urological health condition. It has contributed sizeable burden of morbidity, disability, and medical health expenditure worldwide. There is limited high level of evidence on the efficacy and safety of treatment options of large renal stones. This network meta-analysis has examined the effectiveness and safety of various large renal stone management strategies. Systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) study design was employed to summarize comparative randomized controlled trials on humans with a diagnosis of renal stone larger than or equal to 2 cm in size. Our searching strategy was based on the Population, Interventions, Comparison, Outcomes, and Study (PICOS) approach. Medline via PubMed, Embase, Google scholar, SCOPUS, Science Direct, Cochrane library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to March 2023 to find eligible articles. Data extraction, screening, selection and risk of bias assessment were conducted by two independent reviewers. We found ten randomised control trials which consists 2917 patients, nine of them were labeled as low risk and one article was high risk. This network meta-analysis found that SFR was 86% (95% CI 84-88%) for Mini-PCNL, 86% (95% CI 84-88%) for standard PCNL, 79% (95% CI:73-86%) for RIRS, and 67% (95%CI:49-81 for staged URS for management of large renal stone. Overall complication rate was 32% (95% CI 27-38%) for standard PCNL, 16% (95% CI 12-21%) for Mini-PCNL, and 11% (95% CI 7-16%) for RIRS. Mini-PCNL (RR = 1.14 (95% CI 1.01-1.27) and PCNL (RR = 1.13 (95% CI 1.01-1.27)) were statistically associated with a higher SFR compared to RIRS. The pooled mean hospital stays were 1.56 days (95% CI 0.93-2.19) for RIRS, 2.96 days (95% CI 1.78-4.14) for Mini-PCNL, 3.9 days (95% CI 2.9-4.83) for standard PCNL, and 3.66 (95% CI 1.13-6.2) for staged URS. Mini-PCNL and standard PCNL were the most effective treatment options with significant morbidity and length of hospital stay, while RIRS was the safest management option with acceptable SFR, low morbidity, and short hospital stay.
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy in the treatment of upper urinary tract stones: a meta-analysis comparing clinical efficacy and safety

Yeda Chen,Yaoan Wen,Qingfeng Yu,Xiaolu Duan,Wenqi Wu,Guohua Zeng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-020-00677-4

2020-07-25

BMC Urology

Abstract:Abstract Background Upper urinary tract stones is the most common diseases in urology. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and ureteroscopic lithotripsy (fURL) are common treatment, but both their efficacy and safety are controversial. Thus we aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PCNL and fURL in the treatment of upper urinary tract stones, providing a reference for clinical work. Methods PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and CNKI were searched through Apr. 1, 2019 to identify eligible studies. Data were analyzed by using RevMan 5.3 and Stata 12.0 software. Pooled relative risks (RRs) or weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using fixed or random effects methods. Publication bias and sensitivity analysis were performed. Results Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs), fifteen cohort studies involving 1822 patients were included. Stone-free rate of PCNL was significantly high than that of fURL (RR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.12; P = 0.0004). The decline of hemoglobin in PCNL was significantly high than that of fURL (WMD: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.54, 1.61; P < 0.0001). The number of blood transfusion was significantly greater in the PCNL compared to the fURL (RR: 5.04; 95% CI: 1.78, 14.24; P = 0.002). The incidence of postoperative bleeding or hematuria showed greater significantly difference in the PCNL compared to the fURL (RR: 2.72; 95% CI: 1.55, 4.75; P = 0.0005). Operation time, fever, infection, perforation, requiring drug analgesia was not significantly different between two surgical procedures. Conclusions In the treatment of upper urinary tract stones, the stones clearance rate of PCNL is higher than fURL, and the safety of fURL is higher than PCNL.

urology & nephrology
Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy for large proximal ureteral stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Xueliang Chang,Zhan Yang,Xiaowei Wang,Hu Wang,Yaxuan Wang,Zhenwei Han

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2022.119776

2023-01-01

Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques

Abstract:Introduction: Both percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (LU) are effective treatment options for large proximal ureteral stones.Aim: To perform a meta-analysis on this topic to assess the efficacy, safety, and potential complications of the two procedures.Material and methods: A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Ovid and Scopus to identify eligible suitable studies until May 2022. All studies comparing LU vs PCNL in large proximal ureteral stones were included. The Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager (RevMan) 5.4 software was used to analyze statistical significance.Results: A total of nine publications involving 933 patients (LU 465; PCNL 468) were included, of which 4 were randomized control trails (RCTs) and 5 were non-RCTs. The meta-analysis of available data showed that compared with PCNL, LU had a higher initial stone-free rate (OR = 3.26; p = 0.004), but longer operative time (WMD = 35.08 min; p = 0.0003). However, the final stone-free rate (OR = 2.08; p = 0.07) and length of hospital stay (WMD = 0.32 d; p = 0.48) were comparable between the two groups. Meanwhile, LU had a lower transfusion rate (OR = 0.13; p = 0.007) than PCNL. There was no significant difference in terms of complications (OR = 0.97; p = 0.84), Clavien-Dindo score ≥ 3 complications (OR = 1.03; p = 0.93), auxiliary procedures (OR = 0.44; p = 0.08), or ureteral stenosis (OR = 0.24; p = 0.13) between LU and PCNL.Conclusions: Our meta-analysis revealed that LU is a safe and feasible option for large proximal ureteral stones with a higher initial stone-free rate and lower transfusion rate compared with PCNL.

surgery
Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy Versus Laparoscopic Ureterolithotomy or Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in the Management of Large Proximal Ureteral Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Tao Wu,Xi Duan,Shulin Chen,Xuesong Yang,Tielong Tang,Chang Shu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000471773

2017-01-01

Urologia Internationalis

Abstract:Objectives: To provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing ureterolithotripsy (URS) with percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PCNL) or laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (LU) techniques for the management of large proximal ureteral stones (diameter greater than 10 mm). Methods: A literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, EBSCO, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to identify suitable studies until November 2016. We used weighted mean difference to measure operative time and hospital stay, OR to measure stone free rate (SFR), and complication rate. Subgroup analyses were assessed for heterogeneity. Results: Fourteen publications strictly met our eligibility criteria of which 7 were randomized control studies (RCTs) and 7 non-RCTs. Meta-analysis of extractable data showed that LU and PCNL had higher SFR than URS. URS led to a similar hospital stay like that of LU. However, it had a shorter operative time and lower complication rate than LU. When we compared URS with PCNL, we found a shorter hospital stay in the URS group. However, there was no significant difference in terms of the operative time and complication rate between URS and PCNL. Conclusion: URS should be considered standard therapy for treating large proximal ureteral stones.
Medication errors: you can help reduce the numbers.

M. Kirtane

2001-08-01

Tennessee medicine : journal of the Tennessee Medical Association

Abstract:
Comparison of efficacy and safety of minimally invasive procedures for 10-20 mm pediatric renal Stones-A bayesian network meta-analysis

Fang-Zhou Zhao,Jun Li,Lei Tang,Chun-Ming Li,Yu Zhang,Wen-Ying Wang,Ning Chen,Ye Tian

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2020.08.019

Abstract:Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of various minimally invasive procedures for 10-20 mm pediatric renal stones by Bayesian network meta-analysis (NWA). Methods: We searched clinical comparative trials published in Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library from inception to 12 April 2020. Two researchers evaluated the quality and extracted data individually. Data was analyzed using STATA and GEMYC R package. Results: The overall network meta-analytic outcome of stone free rate (SFR) in a single session revealed that Retrograde Intrarenal Stone Surgery (RIRS), miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) and PCNL showed superiority to extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL). Statistical significance was not detected between any intervention from our pooled network analysis of complication rate. SMP was the most likely to ranking in first place to render stone free status, and it also showed the lowest risk possibility of complications. Mini-PCNL had longer operation time and hospitalization than ESWL. The global and loop inconsistency evaluation demonstrated a rather acceptable outcome apart from the comparisons of complication rate between two randomized control studies. Discussion: Herein, the authors reviewed and explored the optimal management pattern for pediatric 10-20 mm renal stones. This NWA revealed RIRS and mPCNL could render higher SFR without increasing risk of complications compared with ESWL. Although SMP was deemed to be the best choice in our study, the limited source of study and sample size implied the results required to be further validated. In addition, there were still some problems requiring to be underlined for various surgical options. Conclusions: ESWL was inferior to RIRS, mPCNL and PCNL for 10-20 mm pediatric renal stones, among which SMP might be the most ideal option associated with the least possibility of complications and the highest probability of stone clearance.
Efficacy and Safety of Treatment Options for Large Upper Ureteral Stone

Imtiaz Enayetullah,Asaduzzaman Rajib,Mohammad Mahfuzur Rahman,Ashraf Rahman,Sharif Md Shahadat Ali Khan,Faisal Islam,Md Asaduzzaman Rajib,Md Faisal Islam

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3329/bju.v25i2.68588

2023-10-10

Bangladesh Journal of Urology

Abstract:Background: There are three minimally invasive methods for the treatment of large (>1 cm) upper ureteral stones: ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URSL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (LUL). With multiple surgical options, the controversy of choosing the best option for a given patient lies. Objective: To compare efficacy and safety between URSL, PCNL and LUL to determine the best choice. Methodology: This study was conducted from March 2020 to February 2022 with 120 patients who had upper ureteral stones admitted at NIKDU. They were randomized into 3 equal URSL, PCNL & LUL groups, 40 patients in each group. The primary outcome was a stone-free rate after 1 month of surgery, and the secondary outcomes were the duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, and complication rate postoperatively. Result: Eight patients needed auxiliary PCNL after URSL and 1 patient after LUL, but none after PCNL. The stone-free rate was 78.1% (25/32) in the URSL group, 95% (38/ 40) in the PCNL group and 100% (39/39) in the LUL group. Operation time was the shortest with URSL and the longest with LUL (all p <0.05). Hospital stay was shorter in the URSL group compared with PCNL & LUL group (p=0.0001). Operation-related complications were almost similar among the three groups. Conclusion: Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy followed by PCNL is the most efficacious modality for treating large upper ureteral stones with a superior stone-free rate and lesser need for auxiliary treatments compared to URSL. Bangladesh J. Urol. 2022; 25(2): 93-97
Which is the best treatment of pediatric upper urinary tract stones among extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery: a systematic review

Qing He,Kaiwen Xiao,Yuntian Chen,Banghua Liao,Hong Li,Kunjie Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-019-0520-2

2019-10-23

BMC Urology

Abstract:Abstract Background Although the indications of minimally invasive treatments for pediatric urolithiasis are similar to those in adults, it is still crucial to make the right treatment decision due to the special considerations of children. This review aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in the management of pediatric upper urinary tract stones. Methods EMBASE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library were searched from their first available date to March 2018. The studies that meet the inclusive criteria were included. The efficacy and safety of the treatments were assessed by means of meta-analysis of the stone free rate (SFR), complication rate, effectiveness quotient (EQ) and secondary outcome indicators. Results A total of 13 comparative studies were identified for data analysis. PCNL presented a significantly higher SFR compared with SWL. Similarly, the single-session SFR of RIRS was significantly higher than SWL. However, no significant difference was found between RIRS and SWL in the overall SFR. There was no significant difference between PCNL and RIRS in the SFR. Furthermore, no significant differences in complication rates were found among the three therapies. Compared with the other two treatments, PCNL had a longer operative time, fluoroscopy time and hospital stay. SWL had a shorter hospital stay, higher retreatment rate and auxiliary rate in comparison with the other two treatments. The present data also showed that PCNL presented a higher EQ than the other two treatments, and RIRS had a lower efficiency than SWL and PCNL. In the subgroup analysis of pediatric patients with stone ≤20 mm, the comparative results were similar to those described above, except for the higher complication rate of PCNL than SWL. Conclusions Although SWL as an outpatient procedure provides shorter hospital stay and reduces operative time, it has a lower SFR and higher retreatment rate than the other two treatments. PCNL exhibits a higher SFR and EQ than SWL; nevertheless, it has a longer operative time and fluoroscopy time than the other two procedures. RIRS offers a similar SFR as PCNL but a lower efficiency than PCNL.

urology & nephrology
Efficacy of Flexible Ureteroscopy Lithotripsy and Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in the Treatment of Patients with Kidney Stones and Their Impact on Inflammatory Response and Renal Function

Jianhua Wang,Yang Wang,Jie Yin,Lei Xia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.62713/aic.3175

Abstract:Background: Kidney stones are one of the most common benign diseases in urology. As technology updates and iterates, more minimally invasive and laparoscopic surgeries with higher safety performance appear. This paper explores the effectiveness of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in treating kidney stones, focusing on their effects on inflammatory responses and renal function. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 200 patients with kidney stones treated in our hospital between June 2019 and June 2023. 100 patients who underwent RIRS were included in the RIRS group. Another 100 patients who underwent PCNL treatment were included in the PCNL group. The intraoperative blood loss, operation duration, and hospitalization time of the two groups of patients were recorded and compared. The enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was used to detect the levels of inflammatory factors in the serum of the two groups of patients: [serum amyloid A (SAA), interleukin-6 (IL-6) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (CRP)] and renal function index [blood urea nitrogen (BUN), creatinine (Scr) and serum cystatin (Cys-c)]. The two groups of patients were recorded separately: Postoperative complications and stone-free rate. Results: Operation duration was longer for the RIRS group than the PCNL group, which exhibited significantly less intraoperative blood loss and shorter hospital stays (p < 0.05). Before surgery, there was no statistically significant difference in the serum levels of SAA, IL-6, and CRP between the two groups of patients (p > 0.05). On the first day after surgery, the serum SAA levels in both groups were lower than before surgery, IL-6 and CRP levels were higher than before surgery, and the serum levels of SAA, IL-6, and CRP in the RIRS group were significantly lower than those in the PCNL group. The difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Before surgery, there was no statistically significant difference in the serum BUN, Scr, and Cys-c levels between the two groups of patients (p > 0.05). On the first day after surgery, the serum BUN, Scr, and Cys-c levels of the two groups of patients were significantly higher than those before surgery. The serum BUN, Scr, and Cys-c levels of the RIRS group were significantly lower than those of the PCNL group, and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Both surgical methods have sound stone-clearing effects regarding long-term stone clearance rates 1 month and 3 months after surgery (p > 0.05). PCNL had a better stone clearance rate on the 2nd postoperative day (p < 0.05). The incidence of postoperative complications in the RIRS group was significantly lower than that in the PCNL group, and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Conclusion: For kidney stones ≤2 cm, PCNL showed higher stone clearance rates on the second postoperative day. However, RIRS and PCNL demonstrated adequate long-term stone clearance at 1 and 3 months post-surgery. Both surgical methods are safe and effective, and RIRS is safer than PCNL. Compared with PCNL, RIRS is a new method of kidney stone operation, which has less trauma to the patient's body and fewer complications after the operation, speeding up the recovery process of the patient.
Ferene-S as the chromogen for serum iron determinations.

S. Eskelinen,M. Haikonen,S. Räisänen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00365518309168286

Scandinavian Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Investigation

Abstract:Ferene-S was tested as the iron chromogen and the results were compared with the chromogen Ferrozine. With Ferene-S the volume of serum could be halved. We also tried to adapt Ferene-S in total iron binding capacity determinations but failed. From the interfering substances in serum iron determination the effects of bilirubin, copper and zinc were tested. Bilirubin was not observed to have any effect on iron values with Ferene-S or Ferrozine as chromogens. Copper ions had a distinct additive effect with both chromogens, but it could be eliminated by the addition of thiourea to the solutions. Zinc had no effect.
A Comparative Study on Outcomes of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery (RIRS), Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL), and Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) for Lower Pole Renal Calculi of < 1.5 cm

Ishwar Ram Dhayal,Rakesh Gupta,Alok Srivastava,Priyanka Rai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5812/numonthly-128168

2023-04-05

Nephro-Urology Monthly

Abstract:Background: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), established in the 1970s, has replaced open surgery for large stones. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), once the preferred first-line treatment for small-to-medium-sized renal stones, has a questionable charm owing to patient reluctance for repeated treatments and hospitalizations since ESWL has a reduced stone-free rate (SFR). Flexible ureterorenoscopy, also referred to as RIRS, originally applied in the management of lower pole stones resistant to ESWL, is increasingly being used as a primary modality to manage lower pole stones, and it may potentially achieve higher SFR than ESWL and lower morbidity than PCNL for patients with low-volume stone diseases. Objectives: Observations were made to compare ESWL, mini PCNL, and RIRS in managing lower pole renal calculi of < 1.5 cm. Methods: This observational study encompassed all patients with lower pole renal stones with < 1.5 cm diameter and < 1000 HU density who underwent mini PCNL, RIRS, or ESWL from January 2020 to July 2021. There were 40, 60, and 60 patients in the RIRS, mini PCNL, and ESWL groups, respectively, for all of whom preoperative CT urogram was performed. The patients were informed of the procedures, and their informed consent was obtained. The stone-free rates of the three modalities were compared, and the outcomes were statistically analyzed. Results: The mean stone sizes in the present study were 12.99 × 3.56 mm in mini PCNL, 10.62 × 2.51 mm in RIRS, and 10.93 × 3.13 mm in ESWL. The mini PCNL group's SFR was significantly higher than those of other groups: 59 (98.3%) in mini PCNL, 34 (85%) in RIRS, and 46 (76.7%) in ESWL (P = 0.002). Out of the 60 patients in the mini PCNL group, only one (1.7%) required an ancillary procedure, while only six (10%) out of 40 patients in the RIRS group and 11 (18.33%) out of 60 patients in the ESWL group required the ancillary procedure (P = 0.031). Conclusions: For lower pole renal calculi < 1.5 cm, mini PCNL has the highest SFR, followed by RIRS and ESWL, in sequence. The ancillary procedure rate was 18.33% in the ESWL group, which was higher than those of mini PCNL (1.7%) and RIRS (10%).
The efficacy and safety of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Dechao Feng,Xiao Hu,Yin Tang,Ping Han,Xin Wei

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.2020.61.2.115

2020-01-01

Investigative and Clinical Urology

Abstract:Purpose: Our aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) versus standard PCNL (sPCNL) to provide higher-level evidence.Materials and Methods: Eligible randomized controlled trials were identified from electronic databases. The data analysis was performed by the Cochrane Collaboration's software RevMan 5.3.Results: A total of 1,219 patients from 9 articles published between 2004 and 2019 were included. Compared with those who received sPCNL, patients who received mPCNL experienced a higher stone-free rate (SFR) (odds ratio [OR], 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.99; p=0.03), lower transfusion rates (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.17-0.63; p=0.0007), and lower drops in hemoglobin (mean difference [MD], -0.72; 95% CI, -1.04 to -0.40; p<0.00001), but the operative time seemed to be significantly longer (MD, 10.98; 95% CI, 3.64-18.32; p=0.003). Of note, there was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the SFR (p=0.09) for renal calculi ≥2 cm. In addition, the meta-analysis results showed no significant differences between the groups regarding urine leakage (p=0.60), postoperative fever (p=0.71), impaired ventilation (p=0.97), or total complications (p=0.29) with no heterogeneity between trials. These results remain unaffected with regard to renal calculi ≥2 cm.Conclusions: Our findings suggested that mPCNL had a higher SFR than sPCNL and there was no significant difference between the two groups for renal stones ≥2 cm. Besides, mPCNL tended to be associated with significantly less bleeding and a lower transfusion rate, but the duration of the procedure seemed to be significantly longer.

urology & nephrology
Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery for intra‐abdominal emergency conditions

Juliane Bingener,I. Ibrahim-zada

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9352

2014-01-01

Abstract:Patient benefits from natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) are of interest in acute‐care surgery. This review provides an overview of the historical development of NOTES procedures, and addresses their current uses and limitations for intra‐abdominal emergency conditions.
Comparative Efficacy on Flexible Ureteroscopy Lithotripsy and Miniaturized Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for the Treatment of Medium-Sized Lower-Pole Renal Calculi.

Lianchao Jin,Bing Yang,Zhe Zhou,Ningchen Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2019.0504

2019-01-01

Journal of Endourology

Abstract:Objective: To demonstrate the safety and efficacy of flexible ureteroscopy lithotripsy (FURL) and miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) through the comparative studies in treating medium-sized lower-pole renal calculi. Methods: Two hundred and twenty eligible patients with lower-pole renal calculi (1-2 cm) were enrolled and further randomly assigned into FURL group and MPCNL group. Patients' demographics, preoperative characteristics, intraoperative and postoperative complications, stone-free rate, and comfort and pain indicated by Bruggrmann Comfort Scale (BCS) and visual analog scale (VAS) were evaluated and recorded. Trauma index such as white blood cells, C-reactive protein (CRP), and interleukin (IL)-6 were also detected. Results: The stone-free rate and the operating time were comparable in FURL and MPCNL groups. Intraoperative and postoperative complication analysis showed that blood loss and hospital stay were significantly lower in the FURL group compared with MPCNL group. No significant difference in minor pelvic perforation, false passage, hemoglobin drop, persistent hematuria, ureteral perforation, moderate fever, urosepsis, and postoperative serum creatinine level was observed. However, as to comfort and pain indicated by BCS and VAS and stress indicated by CRP and IL-6, FURL was superior to MPCNL. Conclusion: FURL could be a better alternative surgical method to MPCNL with similar curative effect and less blood loss and hospital stay.
Application of Micro-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (Micro-PCNL) combined with FURL in 1-2 cm symptomatic, refractory lower calyceal stones

Xiao-qiang Shi,Tao Ma,Wentao Wang,Zhenyu Cui,Xin-yao Li,Ying Gao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.39.6.6782

2023-09-10

Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences

Abstract:Objective: To investigate the safety and efficacy of Micro-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy(Micro-PCNL) combined with flexible ureteroscopic lithotomy(FURL) in the treatment of 1-2 cm symptomatic, refractory lower calyceal stones. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed concerning the clinical data of 28 patients with 1-2 cm symptomatic, refractory lower calyceal stones. When there was a difficulty in performing FURL in Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University from January 2019 to February 2022, ultrasound-guided F4.8 visual puncture was performed on the lower calyceal stone,with a holmium laser was then used to treat the remaining stones, followed by drainage using a flexible ureteroscopic sheath and postoperative indwelling of the ureteral stent without a nephrostomy tube. The surgery time, intraoperative bleeding and stone-free rate(SFR) were recorded, and the VAS score was used to evaluate the patients' pain status. Results: The surgery was completed successfully in an average of 43.46 ± 10.04 minutes, and the puncture time was 3.46 ± 0.69 minutes. The SFR was 85.71%(24/28) and 92.86%(26/28) at one day and 30 days after surgery, respectively. Two patients with residual stones greater than 0.6 cm in size underwent extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy four weeks after surgery. Patients were followed up for three months after surgery, and the SFR was revised to 96.43%(27/28). In addition, the VAS scores of all patients decreased significantly from before to after surgery, and the difference was statistically significant(p< 0.05). Conclusion: Micro-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (Micro-PCNL) combined with FURL is safe and effective in the treatment of 1-2 cm symptomatic, refractory lower calyceal stones. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.39.6.6782 How to cite this: Shi XQ,Ma T,Wang W, Cui Z, Li X, Gao Y. Application of Micro-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (Micro-PCNL) combined with FURL in 1-2 cm symptomatic, refractory lower calyceal stones. Pak J Med Sci. 2023;39(6):---------. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.39.6.6782 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

medicine, general & internal

A Fast Lexicographic Algorithm for Association Rule Mining in Web Applications

Comparison of safety and efficacy of laparoscopic pyelolithotomy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with large renal pelvic stones: a meta-analysis.

A Comparative Study to Analyze the Efficacy and Safety of Flexible Ureteroscopy Combined with Holmium Laser Lithotripsy for Residual Calculi after Percutaneous Nephrolithotripsy

Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Versus Endoscopic Combined Intrarenal Surgery with Flexible Ureteroscope for Partial Staghorn Calculi: A Randomised Controlled Trial

Efficacy and safety of surgical treatment for 1-2 cm sized lower pole of renal stone: network meta-analysis of randomized control trials

Efficacy and safety of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery in the treatment of upper urinary tract stones (> 1 cm): a systematic review and meta-analysis of 18 randomized controlled trials

Efficacy and safety of various endosurgical procedures for management of large renal stone: a systemic review and network meta-analysis of randomised control trials

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy in the treatment of upper urinary tract stones: a meta-analysis comparing clinical efficacy and safety

Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy for large proximal ureteral stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy Versus Laparoscopic Ureterolithotomy or Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in the Management of Large Proximal Ureteral Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Medication errors: you can help reduce the numbers.

Comparison of efficacy and safety of minimally invasive procedures for 10-20 mm pediatric renal Stones-A bayesian network meta-analysis

Efficacy and Safety of Treatment Options for Large Upper Ureteral Stone

Which is the best treatment of pediatric upper urinary tract stones among extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery: a systematic review

Efficacy of Flexible Ureteroscopy Lithotripsy and Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in the Treatment of Patients with Kidney Stones and Their Impact on Inflammatory Response and Renal Function

Ferene-S as the chromogen for serum iron determinations.

A Comparative Study on Outcomes of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery (RIRS), Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL), and Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) for Lower Pole Renal Calculi of < 1.5 cm

The efficacy and safety of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery for intra‐abdominal emergency conditions

Comparative Efficacy on Flexible Ureteroscopy Lithotripsy and Miniaturized Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for the Treatment of Medium-Sized Lower-Pole Renal Calculi.

Application of Micro-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (Micro-PCNL) combined with FURL in 1-2 cm symptomatic, refractory lower calyceal stones