A new item has been added to the shopping cart

×
×

Tell to a friend

Your Name:
E-mail of your friend:
Message:
Captcha CAPTCHA code
Enter the text in the image above

×

Already a subscriber? Log in now for online Access.

×

Artículo Tomo 70, Número. 5, Junio 2017

Archivos Españoles de Urología

Comparison of ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy and micro-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in moderate-size renal stones.

Authors: Tolga Karakan, Muhammet Fatih Kilinc, Murat Bagcioglu, Omer Gokhan Doluoglu, Yildiray Yildiz, Arif Demirbas, Selen Bozkurt and Berkan Resorlu.

Arch. Esp. Urol. 2017; 70 (5): 550-555

Vol. 70, Number. 5, June 2017

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the success and complications of ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy and micro-percutaneous nephrolithotomy techniques.

METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from 74 patients. Moderate-size stones were included in the study.

RESULTS: Forty-two patients were included in MPNL, and 32 patients were included in UPNL groups. Among our patient cohort, 42 (56.7%) were males, and 32 (43.3%) were females. The mean age of the patients was 40±13.2 years in the MPNL group, and the mean age of the patients was 42±14.1 years in the UPNL group. The mean stone size was 17±3.2 mm in the MPNL group and 16.4±3.7 mm in the UPNL group. The stonefree rates were 88.1% (37/42) and 90.6% (29/32) in the MPNL and UPNL groups, respectively; there was no statically significant difference between the groups. The mean hospital stay was 1.4±0.23 days in the MPNL group and 1.1±0.12 day in the UPNL group.

CONCLUSIONS: Two techniques have similar success and complication rates, and both may be preferred particularly in moderate-size stones. Our experience supports that our UPNL technique is safe and effective using with a standard ureteroscope.

ONLY IN ENGLISH.



Copyright © 2015 | Valid support N°12/08-W-CM | ISSN-ONLINE: 1576-8260 |