[Role of dendritic cells in the immunopathogenesis and therapy of liver diseases].

M. Onji

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2177/JSCI.27.64

2004-04-01

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

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.
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.
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
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.
Clinical application of laparoscopic pyeloplasty combined with flexible ureteroscopy in the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction and kidney calculi

SUN Ying-hao,GAO Xiao-feng,LI Ling

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13499/j.cnki.fqjwkzz.2013.07.022

2013-01-01

Abstract:Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the laparoscopic pyeloplasty(LP) combined with flexible ureteroscopy(f-URS) in the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction(UPJO) with renal stones.Methods: The retrospective analysis was made on the clinical data of 18 patients who underwent LP and f-URS for UPJO with renal stones from Jan.2010 to Jun.2013.2 cases were solitary stones located at renal pelvis,4 cases were solitary stones located at lower calyx,other cases had multiple stones which located at renal pelvis and lower calyx.Largest single calculus was 2.6 cm.Mean stone size was(3.1 ± 0.9) cm(range: 1.0-4.8 cm).3 cases had ESWL with poor efficacy.18 patients underwent no other UPJO operations.Results: All cases finished operations successfully with no severe complications such as hemorrhoea or injury of surrounding organs.The average operation time was(110 ± 23) min(range:95-190 min).The average f-URS time was(18.4 ±6.0) min(range:8-30 min),and all f-URS inspected the collecting system successfully with no blind area.The postoperative KUB showed no residual stone fragments in all cases.Hydronephrosis in 13 cases was significantly reduced and 3 cases had no hydronephrosis after removal of double J tubes.The success rate reached 88.9%.Conclusions: LP combined with f-URS treatment is a very safe,effective and minimally invasive technique.It might be the ideal option for UPJO with renal stones.
The Comparison Study of Flexible Ureteroscopic Suctioning Lithotripsy With Intelligent Pressure Control Versus Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Suctioning Nephrolithotomy in Treating Renal Calculi of 2 to 3 cm in Size

Hua Chen,Xuanxi Qiu,Chuance Du,Donghua Xie,Tairong Liu,Gongxian Wang,Leming Song

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1553350619849782

2019-05-26

Surgical Innovation

Abstract:Purpose. To compare the efficacy and safety of flexible ureteroscopic suctioning lithotripsy (FURS) using patented designed intelligent irrigation and suctioning intraluminal pressure-control platform and integrated pressure-measuring suctioning ureteral access sheath versus minimally invasive suctioning percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) in treating renal calculi at 2 to 3 cm in size. Methods. Ninety-one patients who met the criteria were included in the study. Among these, 46 patients underwent transurethral flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy and the other 45 patients underwent MPCNL. We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data for the 2 groups and parameters including stone clearance rate, complication rate, average operative time, average postoperative hospitalization duration, and average postoperative hemoglobin level decrease were compared. Results. The hospitalization time for the FURS group was 3.53 ± 1.25 days, which was statistically shorter than that of the MPCNL group, which was 6.54 ± 2.36 days. There was significantly more patients needing pain medication postoperatively in the MPCNL group with statistical difference between the 2 groups ( P = .015). Also, there was more significant hemoglobin level drop in the MPCNL group with statistical difference between the 2 groups. However, there were no statistical differences between the 2 groups on average operative time and stone clearance rate. Conclusion. Both the operative methods are safe and efficacious in treating solitary renal calculus at 2 to 3 cm in size. However, FURS has more advantages including shorter hospital stay, less complication, and less bleeding.

surgery
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.
Clinical efficacy and safety of flexible ureteroscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for large kidney stones: A retrospective comparative study

Qiu-Lian Wang,Jun-Qiang Liu,Juan Cao,Jun Ding

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v12.i21.4483

2024-07-26

World Journal of Clinical Cases

Abstract:BACKGROUND Renal stones ranging 20–40 mm are very common in China. Although no large-sample clinical studies have confirmed the clinical efficacy and safety of this method, there is also a lack of comparative data with traditional treatment. AIM To investigate the clinical efficacy of flexible ureteroscopy (FURS) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) by postoperative stone clearance and changes in soluble vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 (sVCAM-1) and kidney injury molecule 1 (KIM-1) levels in patients with large kidney stones (> 2 cm in diameter). METHODS This single-center observational study was performed at a Chinese hospital between January 1, 2021, and October 30, 2023. All 250 enrolled patients were diagnosed with large kidney stones (> 2 cm) and divided into a FURS group (n = 145) and a PCNL group (n = 105) by the surgical method. The FURS group was treated with flexible ureteroscopy and the PCNL group was treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy. The operation time, time to palinesthesia, intraoperative blood loss, drop in hemoglobin, length of hospital stay, stone clearance rate, and complications were recorded in the two groups. Preoperative and postoperative serum sVCAM-1 levels, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), urine KIM-1 levels, preoperative and postoperative pain visual analog scale (VAS) and Wisconsin quality of life questionnaire (WISQOL) scores were also documented. RESULTS All 250 eligible patients completed the follow-up. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups (P > 0.05). The operation time in the FURS group was significantly greater than that in the PCNL group. The time to ambulation, intraoperative blood loss, decrease in hemoglobin, and length of hospital stay were significantly lower in the FURS group than in the PCNL group. The FURS group also had a significantly higher stone clearance rate and a lower incidence of postoperative complications. There was no significant difference in antibiotic use between the groups. Postoperative serum sVCAM-1 levels, urine KIM-1 levels, and VAS scores were lower in the FURS group than in the PCNL group, but postoperative ESR and WISQOL scores were greater in the FURS group than in the PCNL group. CONCLUSION FURS demonstrated superior clinical efficacy in treating large kidney stones (> 2 cm in diameter) compared PCNL. It not only improved the postoperative stone clearance rate and reduced complications and recovery time but also positively affected serum SCM-1, ESR, and urine KIM-1 levels, subsequent improvement of patient quality of life.

medicine, general & internal
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
Comparison of efficacy and safety of flexible ureteroscopy and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy for 2-3 cm renal calculi in women: a single-center study

Z Li,H-R Zhang,W-D Chen,H Luo,W-J Xu,Q-G Gao,J-Y Li,M-H Lei

DOI: https://doi.org/10.26355/eurrev_202311_34481

Abstract:Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (FURSL) and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) in the treatment of 2-3 cm renal calculi in women. Patients and methods: Clinical data of 186 patients who underwent mPCNL (n=96) and FURSL (n=90) surgery in our hospital from June 2018 to February 2023 were collected. Several parameters were assessed and compared between the two groups, including operation duration, length of hospital stay, cost of hospitalization, pain intensity measured by the visual analogue scale (VAS), patient comfort assessed using the Bruggrmann Comfort Scale (BCS), decrease in hemoglobin levels, changes in blood urea nitrogen (BUN), fluctuations in serum creatinine (Scr), hypersensitive C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels, complication rates, immediate post-operative stone-free rate (RSFR), and long-term stone-free rate (LSFR). Results: The comparative analysis of patient age, body mass index (BMI), stone size, computed X-ray tomography (CT) value of stones, number of stones, and comorbidities revealed no statistically significant differences between the mPCNL and FURSL groups (p>0.05). The mPCNL cohort exhibited a markedly lower duration of operation (p<0.001) and BCS score (p<0.001) compared to the FURSL cohort. Nonetheless, the mPCNL cohort demonstrated significantly higher hospitalization expenses (p<0.001), length of hospital stay (p<0.001), VAS score for pain (p<0.001), and level of hemoglobin decrease (p<0.001) in comparison to the FURSL cohort. Moreover, the immediate post-operative stone-free rate (RSFR) was significantly higher in the mPCNL group (p=0.007). The long-term stone-free rate (LSFR), however, showed no significant difference between the two groups (p=0.160). Furthermore, the FURSL group exhibited significantly fewer overall complications in contrast to the mPCNL group (p=0.006). Conclusions: mPCNL and FURSL are both safe and effective surgical methods for treating 2-3 cm renal calculi in women. However, FURSL holds distinct advantages, including minimally invasive procedure, accelerated recovery, reduced cost, and lower incidence of complications.
Comparison of Percutaneous Neprolithotomy and Flexible Ureteroscopy for Solitary Renal Pelvis Calculi and the Impacts on Renal Function

刘斌,董杰,周水根,田丰,张征宇,高建平,王龙信

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1009-6604.2014.05.014

2014-01-01

Abstract:Objective To compare the clinical effect of percutaneous neprolithotomy ( PCNL ) and flexible ureteroscopy Holmium laser lithotripsy in the treatment of solitary renal pelvis calculi and the impacts on renal function . Methods From July 2011 to June 2013, 58 cases of solitary renal pelvis calculi were treated by holmium laser lithotripsy in our department , of which 30 cases were treated with PCNL ( PCNL group ) , and 28 cases with electronic flexible ureteroscopy ( Flexible ureteroscopy group ) respectively.The operative time, blood loss, stone clearance rate of the two groups were compared .Moreover, blood samples of the two groups were analyzed for blood urea nitrogen ( BUN ) , creatinine ( Cr ) , neutrophils gelatinase-associated lipocalin ( NGAL ) concentration 24 h before operation and 3, 24, 48 h after operation, respectively. Results There was no statistical difference in stone clearance rate [76.2%(PCNL group) vs.75.6%(Flexible ureteroscopy group), χ2 =0.022, P=0.882].The mean blood loss in Flexible ureteroscopy group was (50.3 ±21.5) ml, which was less than that of PCNL group (80.2 ±20.5) ml (t=5.422, P=0.000), while the operative time was longer than that of PCNL group [(60.5 ±25.1) min vs.(45.3 ±10.5) min, t=-3.045, P=0.004].The serum NGAL in the two groups significantly increased 3 h after operation [PCNL group: (3.8 ±0.7)μg/L vs. (6.3 ±0.5)μg/L, q=22.068,P<0.05;Flexible ureteroscopy group:(3.6 ±0.6)μg/L vs.(7.9 ±0.8)μg/L, q=33.457, P<0.05], with that of Flexible ureteroscopy group being higher than that of the PCNL group [(7.9 ±0.8)μg/L vs.(6.3 ±0.5)μg/L, t=-9.200,P=0.000].The serum NGAL in the two groups began to decrease 24 h after operation but didn’t reach its preoperative level 48 h after operation(q=4.414,P<0.05;q=8.559,P<0.05).The levels of Cr and BUN in two groups did not show significant changes between preoperation and postoperation (P>0.05). Conclusion PCNL and flexible ureteroscopy are effective in the treatment of solitary renal pelvis calculi , and both could cause reversible damage on renal function .
Flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy with a suctioning ureteral access sheath for removing upper urinary calculi under local anesthesia

Zhaolin Zhang,Song Leng,Tianpeng Xie,Yuanhu Yuan,Xiaoning Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2023.1242981

IF: 1.8

2023-08-31

Frontiers in Surgery

Abstract:Objectives We aimed to probe the safety and effectiveness of flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (FURL) with a suctioning ureteral access sheath (S-UAS) for removing upper urinary calculi under local anesthesia (LA). Materials and methods The clinical data of 56 patients with upper urinary calculi treated by FURL with an S-UAS under LA during the period between September 2019 and November 2022 were analyzed retrospectively. For LA, intramuscular pethidine (1.0–2.0 mg/kg) and phenergan (25 mg) were administered 30 min prior to surgery, and oxybuprocaine hydrochloride gel was administered through the urethra at the start of the surgery. The S-UAS and flexible ureteroscope were used for FURL. Demographic characteristics, stone-related parameters, and clinical outcomes were analyzed. Result A total of 66 procedures were performed successfully on 46 patients (Group A), who underwent unilateral surgeries, and on 10 patients (Group B) who underwent same-session bilateral surgeries. All 56 patients were operated upon without altering the anesthesia strategy, and none required additional analgesia. The mean stone sizes of the Group A and Group B patients were 20.24 ± 5.45 mm and 29.40 ± 3.89 mm, respectively. The mean operative times of the two groups were 53.04 ± 13.35 min and 90.00 ± 15.81 min, respectively. In Group A, the stone-free rates (SFRs) were 76.1% (35/46) and 85.1% (40/46) at postoperative day 1 and day 30, respectively. In Group B, the SFRs were 80.0% (16/20) and 85.0% (17/20), respectively. Four (8.7%) patients in Group A suffered complications such as fever, stent pain, urosepsis, and steinstrasse. In Group B, one (10%) patient suffered from fever. Conclusion FURL, combined with an S-UAS under LA, is a feasible option and provides satisfactory clinical outcomes for appropriately selected patients.

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.
Clinical comparative study of single-use and reusable digital flexible ureteroscopy for the treatment of lower pole stones: a retrospective case-controlled study

Qiang Jing,Fan Liu,Xiaobin Yuan,Xuhui Zhang,Xiaoming Cao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-024-01541-5

2024-07-18

Abstract:Objectives: To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of single-use and reusable digital flexible ureteroscopy for the treatment of lower pole stones. Methods: We enrolled 135 patients underwent reusable flexible ureteroscopy (FURS) and 78 patients underwent single-use digital FURS. Demographic, clinical variables, anatomical parameters of the lower calyx and perioperative indicators were compared in the two groups. Results: Thirty-six patients in the infundibuloureter angle (IPA) < 45° subgroup had a mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL), including 25 patients in the reusable FURS group and 11 patients in the single-use FURS group. The demographic and clinical variables in the two FURS groups were comparable. There was no statistical difference in the success rate of stone searching (P > 0.05). In terms of the success rate of lithotripsy, there was also no statistical difference in the IPA ≥ 45° subgroup (P > 0.05), whereas single-use FURS was superior in the IPA < 45° subgroup (χ2 = 6.513, P = 0.011). The length of the working fiber in the reusable FURS and single-use FURS groups was 3.20 ± 0.68 mm and 1.75 ± 0.47 mm, respectively (t = 18.297, P < 0.05). The use of a stone basket in the reusable FURS (31/135, 23.0%) was significantly higher than that in the single-use FURS (8/78, 10.3%) (χ2 = 5.336, P = 0.021). Compared with the reusable FURS group, the single-use FURS group had shorter operation times (P < 0.05) and higher stone-free rate (SFR) (χ2 = 4.230, P = 0.040). There was no statistical difference in the intraoperative transfer of mini-PCNL and postoperative complications between the two groups (P > 0.05). Conclusions: Single-use and reusable FURS are alternative methods for removal of lower pole stones (i.e., 2 cm or less). Single-use FURS has a high success rate of lithotripsy, shorter operation time, and high stone-free rate.
Comparison of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy in supine position and flexible ureteroscopy for proximal ureteral calculi

Yi ZHANG,Cheng-fan YU,He ZHU,Shi-hua JIN,Lian-chao JIN,Jun MENG,Yan-qun NA

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1000-6702.2013.10.014

2013-01-01

Abstract:Objective To compare the safety and clinical efficiency between minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy(MPCNL)in supine position and flexible ureteroscopy(FURS)in management of proximal ureteral calculi.Methods From Oct.2010 to May.2012,76 patients with single proximal ureteral calculus between 10-20 mm failed in SWL or other conservative therapy accepted MPCNL (32 cases)or FURS(44 cases).There was no significant difference between the groups in base-line parameters.Stone sizes were(15.6±2.5)mm and(14.9±2.3)mm,P＞0.05.Procedural time,post-operative hospitalization stay,complication rates(Clavien degree Ⅱ or over)and stone free rates were compared.Results In these two groups,procedural time was(49.3± 11.7)and(67.2± 17.3)min,P＜0.05,postoperative hospitalization stay were(4.2±1.1)and(1.8±0.8)days,P＜0.05,complication rates were 12.5％ and 6.8％,P＞0.05 and stone free rates(residual fragments≤3 mm)were 93.7％ and 84.1％,P＞0.05.Conclusions For patients with surgically indicated proximal ureteral calculi,both minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy in supine position and flexible ureteroscopy are effective and safe therapeutic modalities.Patients treated with flexible ureteroscopy have faster postoperative recovery.
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.
Comparison between Retrograde Flexible Ureteroscopy and Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for the Treatment of Renal Stones of 2-4 cm

Cozma Cosmin,Dragos Adrian Georgescu,Petrisor Geavlete,Razvan-Ionut Popescu,Bogdan Geavlete

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina59010124

2023-01-08

Abstract:Background and objectives: Renal stones are widespread, with a lifetime prevalence of 10% in adults. Flexible ureteroscopy enables urologists to treat lower calyx stones or even complex renal stones through the natural orifice and achieve an acceptable stone-free rate. Hence, we analyzed the effectiveness and safety of FURS versus PCNL in treating renal stones between 20 and 40 mm in diameter. Materials and methods: We retrospectively analyzed 250 consecutive patients with large renal solitary stones (stone burden between 2 and 4 cm) from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2020. The patients were divided into two groups: group 1 (125 patients), in which the patients were treated by a retrograde flexible ureteroscopic approach, and group 2 (125 patients), in which we used percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Stone characteristics and anatomical data were observed based on the computed tomography (CT) and/or KUB (Kidney-ureter-Bladder) radiography imaging archive. Results: The mean stone burden was 26.38 ± 4.453 mm in group 1 and 29.44 ± 4.817 mm in group 2. The stone-free rate after the first ureteroscopy was higher for the PNL(percutaneous nephrolithotomy) group (90.4%) than the F-URS group (68%). After two sessions of ureteroscopy, the SFR was 88.8% in the first group, and after three procedures, the SFR rose to 95.2%. The overall complication rate was higher in group 1 than in group 2 (18.4% vs. 16.8%), but without statistical relevance (p > 0.5). Furthermore, we encountered more grade III and IV complications in the PNL group (8.8% vs. 4.8%, p < 0.05). Conclusion: Flexible ureteroscopy proves to be efficient in treating renal stones over 2 cm. However, the patients must be informed that more than one procedure might be necessary to overcome the entire stone burden.
Inert gas elimination from lungs with stratified inhomogeneity: theory.

P. Scheid,M. Hlastala,J. Piiper

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0034-5687(81)90025-6

1981-06-01

Respiration Physiology

Abstract:
Comparison of clinical curative effect of ureteroscopy with holmium laser lithotripsy and retro-peritoneal laparoscope ureterolithotomy on treatment of upper ureteral calculus

Feng TIAN,Jie DONG,Long-xin WANG,Dian FU,Wen CHENG,Li-xin WANG,Liang HUANG,Kai ZHOU

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-271X.2014.04.011

2014-01-01

Abstract:Objective To compare the clinical effect of ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy and retro -peritoneal laparo-scopic ureterolithotomy on treatment of upper ureteral calculus .Methods The data of 70 cases of hospitalized patients with upper ure-teral calculus between May 2011 and May 2012 were retrospectively studied .They were divided into ureteroscopy ( URS) with holmium laser lithotripsy group (38 cases) and retro-peritoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (RPLU) group (32 cases).The data of curative rate,operation time,blood loss,postoperation hospitalization time and complications were compared respectively .Results The curative rate (no calculus>4 mm left) of URS group were 86.8% (33/38),while the curative rate of RPLU group were 100.0%.In URS group,the operation time was (85.63 ±14.01) min,the blood loss was (11.18 ±7.11)mL,the postoperation hospitalization time was (3.95 ±1.51) d and the complication was 5 cases.While the data of these index in RPLU group were (79.94 ±18.59) min,(20.94 ±10.96) mL,(4.53 ±1.24) d and 0 case respectively.There were statistically significant difference in curative rate ,complication and blood loss between RPLU group and URS group (P<0.05).There was no statistically significant differences in operation time and postoperation hospitalization time between the two groups (P>0.05).Conclusion Comparing with URS,RPLU has advantage on higher curative rate and lower complications in the treatment of upper ureteral calculus .While the blood lose of URS is less .
Comparison of the effectiveness of two adjustable negative pressure ureteral access sheaths combined with flex ureteroscopy for ≤ 2 cm renal stones

Deheng Cui,Qinghong Ma,Shengbiao Xie,Guangzhi Wang,Guanghai Li,Guoqiang Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-55333-w

IF: 4.6

2024-02-28

Scientific Reports

Abstract:To compare the safety and effectiveness of the combination of intelligent intrarenal pressure control platforms (IPCP) and flexible ureteral access sheath (FUAS) combined with retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the treatment of renal stones less than 2 cm. We retrospectively collected 383 patients with renal stones who underwent RIRS in our department from June 2022 to October 2023. Inclusion criteria: stone length or the sum of multiple stone lengths ≤ 2 cm. Finally, 99 cases were included and divided into an IPCP group (n = 40) and FUAS group (n = 59) based on surgical methods. The main endpoint was the stone-free rate (SFR) at third months after surgery, with no residual stones or stone fragments less than 2 mm defined as stone clearance. The secondary endpoints were surgical time and perioperative complications, including fever, sepsis, septic shock, and perirenal hematoma. There was no statistically significant difference in general information between the two groups, including age, gender, body mass index, comorbidities, stone side, stone location, stone length, urine bacterial culture, and hydronephrosis. The operation time for IPCP group and FUAS group was 56.83 ± 21.33 vs 55.47 ± 19.69 min (p = 0.747). The SFR of IPCP group and FUAS group on the first postoperative day was 75.00% vs 91.50% (p = 0.024). The SFR was 90.00% vs 94.90% in the third month (p = 0.349).In IPCP group, there were 11 cases with stones located in the lower renal calyces and 17 cases in FUAS group. The SFR of the two groups on the first day and third months after surgery were 45.50% vs 88.20% (p = 0.014) and 63.60% vs 94.10% (p = 0.040), respectively, with statistical differences. For kidney stones ≤ 2 cm, there was no difference in SFR and the incidence of infection-related complications between IPCP and FUAS combined with RIRS, both of which were superior to T-RIRS. For lower renal caliceal stones, FUAS has a higher SFR compared to IPCP.

multidisciplinary sciences

[Role of dendritic cells in the immunopathogenesis and therapy of liver diseases].

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

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

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

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

Clinical application of laparoscopic pyeloplasty combined with flexible ureteroscopy in the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction and kidney calculi

The Comparison Study of Flexible Ureteroscopic Suctioning Lithotripsy With Intelligent Pressure Control Versus Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Suctioning Nephrolithotomy in Treating Renal Calculi of 2 to 3 cm in Size

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

Clinical efficacy and safety of flexible ureteroscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for large kidney stones: A retrospective comparative study

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

Comparison of efficacy and safety of flexible ureteroscopy and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy for 2-3 cm renal calculi in women: a single-center study

Comparison of Percutaneous Neprolithotomy and Flexible Ureteroscopy for Solitary Renal Pelvis Calculi and the Impacts on Renal Function

Flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy with a suctioning ureteral access sheath for removing upper urinary calculi under local anesthesia

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

Clinical comparative study of single-use and reusable digital flexible ureteroscopy for the treatment of lower pole stones: a retrospective case-controlled study

Comparison of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy in supine position and flexible ureteroscopy for proximal ureteral calculi

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

Comparison between Retrograde Flexible Ureteroscopy and Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for the Treatment of Renal Stones of 2-4 cm

Inert gas elimination from lungs with stratified inhomogeneity: theory.

Comparison of clinical curative effect of ureteroscopy with holmium laser lithotripsy and retro-peritoneal laparoscope ureterolithotomy on treatment of upper ureteral calculus

Comparison of the effectiveness of two adjustable negative pressure ureteral access sheaths combined with flex ureteroscopy for ≤ 2 cm renal stones