Quality of life of patients treated for kidney stones 10-20mm in diameter in terms of the type of operation performed: A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Urolithiasis is a common chronic disease whose effect on patients' quality of life (QOL) is considerable but depends on the treatment received, differing between types of surgery. Intrarenal stones can be treated with different techniques: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), flexible ureteroscopy (fURS), and mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL), with proportional success and complication rates. The aim of this study was to qualitatively explore the impact of the different techniques on patients' QOL and understand their experiences of treatment choices. METHODS: Patients treated for medium-sized kidney stones (10-20mm in diameter) were interviewed in a semi-structured manner. The interview data were transcribed and analyzed by theme according to consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) guidelines. RESULTS: Data saturation was achieved after interviewing 15 patients. The mean interview time was 34min (standard deviation (SD), 6.8min). The mean patient age was 54 years (SD, 9.5 years). Eight patients underwent ESWL, 10 were treated with fURS, and 8 underwent mini-PCNL. Twenty-seven subthemes were coded and regrouped into eight major themes, namely: no sense of choice in the decision-making process for eleven patients; extremely negative experiences of double-J stents for fourteen patients; concern about the risk of recurrence or treatment failure for thirteen patients; complicated hygiene and dietary recommendations for nine patients; technique-dependent postoperative outcomes; relatively well-tolerated operations for thirteen patients; a poor experience of sick leave, often because of a double-J stent; different views regarding future operations. In fact, a third of patients would choose the most effective treatment, a third would choose the simplest procedure and the last third would trust their urologist. Patients' experiences of these operations are variable. CONCLUSION: Urologists must support their patients by presenting the different treatment options with clear, appropriate, and unbiased information. This should ensure patients take part in treatment decisions as part of a personalized treatment plan.

[Complications in endourology: Ureteroscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy]. / Complications en endo-urologie : urétéroscopie et néphrolithotomie percutanée.

If surgical treatment of urinary stones is indicated, the urologist has now different modalities depending on each situation. This includes extracorporeal lithotripsy, ureteroscopy (rigid and flexible), and percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Ureteroscopy is also performed for diagnostic purposes, and for the treatment of upper urinary tract tumors. Indications, as well as the steps of each of these techniques will not be discussed in this review. Only intra- and postoperative complications of ureteroscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy will be reviewed, including diagnostic, management, and preventive measures.

[How quickly can a complex stone be treated in percutaneous mini-nephrolithotomy?] / À quelle vitesse peut-on traiter un calcul complexe en mini-percutané ?

OBJECTIVES: Knowing the treatment's time of a complex stone is important for operating programming. It depends on the installation time, renal access time and the rate of fragmentation. The main objective of the study is to calculate the processing speed of complex stones by the percutaneous mini-nephrolithotomy (mini-NLPC) technique. POPULATION AND METHODS: A prospective single-center study was carried out between November 2019 and October 2020. Patients treated with mini-NLPC and with a result without fragment were included. The stone volume was measured using 3D reconstruction software and the operating time was differentiated into installation time, renal access time and fragmentation time. RESULTS: Of the 36 patients treated by the percutaneous technique, 20 patients were included. The median 3D volume of the stones was 4145 mm3 (2211-6998). The median duration of the intervention time was 104.5min (80-125). The fragmentation speed was 48.2 mm3min-1 (30.2-62.5) taking into account the total duration of the intervention and 110.4 mm3min-1 (85.3-126.5) in taking into account only the duration of fragmentation. CONCLUSION: The fragmentation speed for complex stones was 48.2 mm3min-1 (30.2-62.5) taking into account all the different operating times. It would be interesting to compare these results with that of ureteroscopy with the same methodology. LEVEL OF PROOF: C.

Miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery in the treatment of lower pole renal stones.

OBJECTIVES: Miniaturization of percutaneous nephrolithotomy techniques have led to their increased consideration for lower pole renal stones that can prove more challenging to reach using retrograde intrarenal surgery. The objectives of the present study were to evaluate and compare the outcomes of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (miniPCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the treatment of lower pole renal stones. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was performed in two academic urology departments between January 2016 and June 2019. Patients presenting with one or multiple stones of the lower calyx and/or renal pelvis, between 10 and 40mm based on CT-scan treated by miniPCNL or RIRS were included. RESULTS: In all, 115 miniPCNL and 118 RIRS procedures were included. The rate of patients with no significant residual fragment (stone free rate) after the first procedure was higher in the miniPCNL group (69% vs. 52% P=0.01), especially for stones>20mm (63% vs. 24% respectively, P<0.001) and stones with a density≥1000HU (69% vs. 42% respectively, P=0.009). The higher stone free rate of miniPCNL was confirmed in multivariate analysis, adjusting for stone size and number of stones, OR 4.02 (95% CI 2.08-8.11, P<0.0001). The overall postoperative complication rate was higher in the miniPCNL group than in the RIRS group (23% vs. 11%, P=0.01). A second intervention for the treatment of residual fragments was necessary for 9.6% of patients in the miniPCNL group versus 30.5% of patients in the RIRS group (P<0.001). Pre-stenting rate and duration of ureteral drainage (2 [1-8] vs. 25 days [7-37], P<0.001) were lower in the miniPCNL group. CONCLUSIONS: The stone free rate was higher after miniPCNL, especially for stones>20mm and with a density>1000 HU, but was associated with a higher risk of postoperative complications and a longer hospital stay. RIRS resulted in fewer complications at the cost of a higher retreatment rate and longer ureteral stenting. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

[Safety and efficacy of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with neurogenic bladder]. / Néphrolithotomie percutanée chez les patients neurologiques : efficacité et morbidité à long terme.

INTRODUCTION: To assess the efficacy and morbidity of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNLT) in the treatment of renal stones in patients with neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction (NLUTD). METHODS: Retrospective, monocentric study including all patients with NLUTD who had undergone PNLT between 2005 and 2017. Pre-operative clinical data (neurological condition, voiding mode, preoperative urine culture…), peri-operative and post-operative data (success and morbidity) were collected from the patients' charts. Success was defined by the absence of residual fragment (RF), on imaging or intraoperative endoscopy. Partial efficacy was defined by the presence of RF lower than 4mm. Early complications were reported according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. RESULTS: In all, 53 PNLTs were performed, in 35 patients, mostly with spinal cord injury. The success and partial efficacy rates were 66.0% and 71.7% respectively. The failure rate was correlated with increased stone burden (P=0.03), increased size of the largest stone (P=0.02), and the presence of complex stones (P<0.02). The rate of early complications was 41.5%, with 27.3% major, mostly septic, and bleeding. The retreatment rate within 3 years was 41.5%. CONCLUSION: In patients with NLUTD, PNLT allows a high success rate, but with a significant rate of retreatment and infectious complications. However, NLPC remains the gold standard in this population, especially for renal stones larger 20mm, allowing a higher success rate than ureteroscopy and a lower retreatment rate.

The safety of continued low dose aspirin therapy during Complete Supine Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (csPCNL).

OBJECTIVE: Using anticoagulants and antiplatelet drugs in patients with cardiovascular and medical comorbidities is prevalent. Because of hyper vascular nature of kidney, physicians tend to stop using aspirin before percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). We have shown the effects of remaining on low dose aspirin in complete supine PCNL (csPCNL). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The records of 643 patients who underwent csPCNL between 2012 and 2018 were analyzed. Surgical outcomes and complications of patients who were on aspirin therapy and continued it daily (group A) were compared with those not taking aspirin (group B). RESULTS: Of the 643 csPCNLs, 40 (6%) were performed in patients of group A and the rest of 603 (94%) cases were in group B. The differences between the mean age of groups were statistically significant (60.08±9.45, group A and 48.66±12.32, group B) (P<0.001). Thirty-nine (97.5%) of patients in group A and 548 (90.9%) of group B were stone free by the end of the study which was not statistically significant (P=0.118). The mean operative time between groups A and B (43.20±21.37 and 44.83±16.83, respectively) was not considered significant (P=0.561). There was also no significant difference between 2 groups in any types of complications. Multivariate analysis showed that, perioperative aspirin use was not a significant predictor of transfusion, Hb drop, operative time and other complications. CONCLUSIONS: Remaining on aspirin does not increase the risk of bleeding, transfusionand other complications. Consequently, continuing aspirin prioperatively in csPCNL appears safe. There is no fear for continuing aspirin in csPCNL.

[Impact of simulation-based training in endourology: A systematic review of the literature]. / Impact de la formation fondée sur la simulation en endo-urologie : revue systématique de la littérature.

INTRODUCTION: The impact of simulation on the acquisition of surgical skills as well as their transfer to the operating room is still debated. The objective was to assess these two specific points, focusing on the field of endourology. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature, following the PRIMA statement, was performed using Medline database through September 2021 without time limit. Studies focusing on the impact of simulators on the acquisition of surgical technical skills as well as their transfer to the operating room in the field of endourology were included. The endourological procedures were: cystoscopy, ureteroscopy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, endoscopic treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia, endoscopic bladder resection. RESULTS: Among the 11,442 publications identified, fifty-two studies were included in the analysis. The majority reported an improvement in procedure time of the requested tasks and dexterity of participants, regardless of the type of simulator and procedure. The level of evidence of included studies was often low. Few studies evaluated the transfer of acquired skills from the simulator to the operating room. CONCLUSION: This review showed the positive impact of simulation on the acquisition of technical skills in endourology. However, in order to include proficiency-based progression in the curriculum of trainees, some parameters such as the choice of reference simulators, choice of tasks, and method of validation of acquired skills must be validated in a consensual manner to offer a quality training.

[Do the nephrolithometry scoring systems predict the success of percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Comparison of 4 scores: The Guy's stone score, STONE Score, CROES nomogram and S-ReSC score]. / Les scores radiologiques peuvent-t-ils prédire le succès de la NLPC ? Étude comparative du Guy's stone score, du STONE score, du CROES nomogram, et du S-ReSc score.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study is to investigate the factors predictive of surgical outcomes of PCNL and to compare the predictability and accuracy of the Guy's stone score, STONE nephrolithometry, CROES nomogram and S-ReSC score. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed retrospectively the surgical outcomes recorded consecutively and imaging data of preoperative computed tomography scans of patients who underwent PCNL from 2013 to 2016. Patients with asymptomatic residual fragments<4mm were considered stone-free. Preoperative abdominopelvic computerized tomography images of the patients were reviewed and scored according The Guy's stone score, STONE nephrolithometry, CROES nomogram, S-ReSC score by one urologist. RESULTS: A total of 157 PCNLs were reviewed. The overall stone-free rate was 59% (92/157) with a complication rate of 22% (35/157). Stone Burden<542mm3 is significantly associated with stone-free rate (SFR) (P=0.001). On univariate analysis, all the scoring systems were identified as significant factors in terms of SFR. The Guy's Stone Score, the CROES score and the S-ReSC score were associated with complications (P<0.02). The multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the CROES score was identified as a significant factor in terms of SFR and complications (P<0.01). The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for stone burden, the Guy's, STONE score, CROES core and S-ReSC scores showed good results (0.737/0.674/0.762/0.746/0.710) respectively. CONCLUSION: Although the four scoring systems were significantly associated with SFR, the STONE score was a significant predictive factor for SFR and complications after PCNL. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

[Impact of the acquisition of a flexible ureteroscope on the management of upper urinary tract stones in children]. / Impact de l'acquisition d'un urétéroscope souple sur le traitement des calculs du haut appareil urinaire chez l'enfant.

INTRODUCTION: Firstly reported in the early 1990s for the treatment of upper urinary tract stones in adult patients, flexible ureteroscopy (F-URS) has been used in children during the past 10 years and is now considered as a viable, but still second-line alternative to extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy in these patients (ESWL). The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the acquisition of a F-URS on the management of upper urinary tract stones in children. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data of all ESWL, F-URS and percutaneous nephrolithotomy performed for upper urinary tract stones in children from 0 to 18 years old in a single center from 2000 to 2014 have been collected retrospectively. Patients have been divided into two groups: group 1 before the acquisition of the F-URS (2000-2008) and group 2 after the acquisition of the F-URS (2008-2014). Preoperative data and peri-operative outcomes were compared between both groups using the χ(2) test and Fisher exact test for discrete variables and the Mann-Whitney test for continuous variables. RESULTS: Thirty-seven children have been treated during the first era and 32 during the second one. The two groups were similar in terms of age (7.2 years vs 8.1 years; P=0.54), size of the largest stone (15 mm vs 16.2mm; P=0,56) and number of stones per patient (1.4 vs 2; P=0,07) but the sum of stone diameters was higher in group 2 (16.9 mm vs 24.2mm; P=0,048). The stone-free rates were comparable in both groups (28.1% vs 32.2% after the first procedure; P=0.72), as were the mean number of procedures per patient (2.4 vs 2.5; P=0.78), the total length of stay (2.7 days vs 2.9 days; P=0.77), and the number of patients who experienced at least one complication (37.8% vs 40.6%; P=0.87). CONCLUSION: The acquisition of a F-URS allowed the treatment of more complex stones with a similar efficacy and without increasing morbidity. Further studies are needed to define the role of F-URS in the management of upper urinary tract stones in children.

[Flexible ureterorenoscopy vs percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal stone management: Retrospective study]. / Étude rétrospective comparant la néphrolithotomie percutanée et l'uréterorénoscopie souple pour le traitement des calculs intrarénaux.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerance of renal stone fragmentation by flexible ureterorenoscopy (URS), compared to percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients treated between 1998 and 2010 by URS and PCNL for intrarenal stone were reviewed. Patients' and stones' characteristics were analyzed. The preoperative parameters were reported as well as the procedure's efficiency and its complications. Success was defined by the absence of residual lithiasis visualized on renal imaging at 6 months of follow-up. RESULTS: Among 531 patients included, there were 159 PCNL and 372 URS. The mean duration of hospitalization after PCNL was 8±4.6 days and 3±1.7 days after URS. The mean stones' size was higher in the PCNL group (19.9±7.5mm) than for the URS group (9.7±5.6mm; P<0.0001). The stone-free rate was significantly better in the PCNL group for stones measuring between 10 and 20mm (P<0.0001) and for stones of more than 20mm (P=0.017). Postoperative complications were significantly more frequent (27 %) and more severe (8.8 % vs Clavien III and IV) in the PCNL, than in the URS group, respectively (P=0.0001). CONCLUSION: PCNL is a successful technique for renal stone fragmentation. However, URS seemed more tolerated despite a lower stone-free rate. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

[Evolution of urolithiasis treatment over 30 years in a French academic institution]. / Évolution du traitement chirurgical de la lithiase urinaire sur 30ans dans un centre hospitalo-universitaire.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the evolution of the annual number of surgical procedures and the surgical management for urolithiasis. METHODS: A retrospective monocentric study was conducted between 1985 and 2014 in a French academic institution. The study population was divided into four groups: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL), flexible and rigid ureteroscopy (URS), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and open surgery. The annual number of surgical procedures as well as the distribution of each technique was determinated by using the operating records. RESULTS: In all, 23,162 procedures were performed during this period. The annual number of procedures rose from 410 in 1985 to 1071 in 2014, representing a rise of 161%. SWL represented 85.6% (351/410) of all surgeries in 1985 then 21.3% in 2014 (228/1071). In contrast, URS accounted for 4.4% (18/410) of all surgeries in 1985 and rose to 76% (814/1071) in 2014. The number of URS has reached the SWL in 2007 and then became the main surgical treatment. The number of PCNL remained stable during the study period but its proportion decreased due to the increased activity, representing 7.1% (29/410) in 1985 and 2.6% (28/1071) in 2014. Open surgery is rarely practiced and represents currently 0.1%. CONCLUSION: The number of surgical procedures for urolithiasis has more than doubled in 30years. SWL represented the main treatment until 2007 and its number decreased whereas ureteroscopy represents now the most common stone treatment in our institution, PCNL remaining stable. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5.