Percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stones: a Cochrane Review.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) vs retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the treatment of renal stones in adults. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, trials registries, other sources of the grey literature, and conference proceedings up to 23 March 2023. We applied no restrictions on publication language or status. Screening, data extraction, risk-of-bias assessment, and certainty of evidence (CoE) rating using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach were done in duplicate by two independent reviewers. This co-publication focuses on the primary outcomes of this review only. RESULTS: We included 42 trials that met the inclusion criteria. Stone-free rate (SFR): PCNL may improve SFRs (risk ratio [RR] 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.18; I2 = 71%; 39 studies, 4088 participants; low CoE). Major complications: PCNL probably has little to no effect on major complications (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.59-1.25; I2 = 15%; 34 studies, 3649; participants; moderate CoE) compared to RIRS. Need for secondary interventions: PCNL may reduce the need for secondary interventions (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.17-0.55; I2 = 61%; 21 studies, 2005 participants; low CoE) compared to RIRS. CONCLUSION: Despite shortcomings in most studies that lowered our certainty in the estimates of effect to mostly very low or low, we found that PCNL may improve SFRs and reduce the need for secondary interventions while not impacting major complications. Ureteric stricture rates may be similar compared to RIRS. We expect the findings of this review to be helpful for shared decision-making about management choices for individuals with renal stones.

Retrograde intrarenal surgery for asymptomatic incidental renal stones: a retrospective, real-world data analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine surgical outcomes and stone-free rates (SFRs) when offering upfront retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) to patients with asymptomatic incidental renal stones (AIRS), as active surveillance, shockwave lithotripsy or upfront intervention in patients with AIRS is still a debate among urologists. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective FLEXible Ureteroscopy Outcomes Registry (FLEXOR), supported by the Team of Worldwide Endourological Researchers (TOWER), examines adult patients who underwent RIRS. We analysed a subset of asymptomatic patients with renal stones on imaging who were treated with RIRS. Data includes patient characteristics, stone specifications, anaesthesia type, perioperative details, complications, and SFR. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to assess factors associated with the SFR. RESULTS: Among 679 patients with AIRS, 640 met the inclusion criteria. The median age was 55 years, with 33.4% being female. In all, 22.1% had positive urine cultures. The median stone diameter was 12 mm, commonly in lower and interpolar locations. RIRS was preferentially performed under general anaesthesia using a reusable scope in 443 cases. Prophylactic antibiotics were administered to 314 patients. The median operation time was 58 min and the median laser time was 24 min. The SFR was 68.8%. The use of holmium laser (odds ratio [OR] 0.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.06-0.63; P < 0.01) and multiple stones (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.19-0.76; P < 0.01) were factors associated with lower odds of being stone free. Overall complications were minimal, with sepsis in 1.6% of patients. Re-interventions were performed in 76 cases (11.8%), with RIRS being the most common in 67 cases (10.6%). CONCLUSION: Our multicentre real-world study is the first of its kind that highlights the pros and cons of offering RIRS to patients with AIRS and demonstrates a favourable SFR with acceptable complications. Pre-emptively discussing potential re-intervention helps patients make informed decisions, particularly in cases involving large and multiple stones.

The relationship between stone-free and patient position in retrograde intrarenal surgery: a randomized prospective study.

PURPOSE: Residual fragments not removed with urinary stone surgery may become symptomatic. In this context, this study was carried out to investigate the effect of performing retrograde intrarenal surgery, which is conventionally performed in the lithotomy position, in the modified lithotomy position (Trend-side) on stone-free rates following the surgery. METHODS: This prospective study consisted of 100 patients with a single kidney stone smaller than 2 cm between 2021 and 2023. These patients were randomized into two groups of 50 patients each to be operated on in the conventional lithotomy and Trend-side positions. Variables were compared using independent t test for continuous variables and chi-square test for categorical variables. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the lithotomy and Trend-side position groups in terms of preoperative size, density, location of the stone, and hydronephrosis degree. Stone-free rate was 72% (n = 36) in the lithotomy group and 92% (n = 46) in the Trend-side group. Hence, there was a significant difference between the groups in the stone-free rate in favor of the Trend-side group (p = 0.009). Fragmentation time was statistically significantly shorter in the Trend-side group than in the lithotomy group (34 ± 17 min vs. 43 ± 14 min; p = 0.006). There was no significant difference between the groups in postoperative complication rates. CONCLUSION: Performing retrograde intrarenal surgery in the Trend-side position shortened the duration of fragmentation compared to the lithotomy position and was associated with higher stone-free rates. In conclusion, the Trend-side position can be safely preferred in patients undergoing retrograde intrarenal surgery due to kidney stones.

Development and validation of a novel home-made bench-top training model for retrograde intrarenal surgery.

PURPOSE: To develop and validate a low-cost homemade bench-top training model to facilitate retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) training. METHODS: The RIRS training model (G-Model) was developed using a surgical glove and a recycled ureter access sheath. Fifteen participants including 10 residents and 5 urologists were enrolled. Designed training curriculum for residents was carried out. Face validity, content validity, construct validity and criterion validity evaluation of the G-Model were carried out. RESULTS: The global score of face and content validity was 4.15 ± 0.53 and 4.65 ± 0.29, respectively. For construct validity, the overall modified global rating scale (mGRS) score was significantly improved [12.5 (5.25) vs. 24.0 (5.25), p = 0.004], and the total task time was significantly shortened (39.5 ± 4.48 min vs. 24.1 ± 3.81 min, p < 0.001) within residents after G-Model training. The baseline mGRS score and total task time of residents were poorer than those of urologists [12.5 (5.25) vs. 32.0 (1.00), p < 0.001; 39.5 ± 4.48 min vs. 16.0 ± 1.58 min, p < 0.001]. Spearman correlation analysis revealed strong correlations between residents' G-Model and real patient performance. CONCLUSION: The current study presented a valid low-cost easily accessible RIRS bench-top training model which could facilitate skill acquisition and translate to real-life scenario.

The relationship between the force applied and perceived by the surgeon during ureteral access sheath placement: ex-vivo experimental model.

PURPOSE: To define a peak force of insertion (PFOI) threshold for ureteral damage during ureteral access sheath (UAS) placement on an experimental ureteral orifice model. METHODS: A specially designed water tank using 2 laparoscopic 5 mm ports and 2 different size (10 Fr and 8 Fr) sealing cap adaptors (SCA) as ureteral orifices was used to perform the test. A 10-12 Fr UAS was fixed to a load cell and the force of insertion (FOI) was continuously recorded with a digital force gauge.13 experts in the field of endourology who participated performed 3 UAS insertions. The FOI was recorded initially with 10 Fr followed by 8 Fr SCA. On the final insertion, the orifice was obstructed, leaving a 5 cm length to insert the UAS. The experts were asked to "Stop at the point they anticipate ureteral damage, and they would not proceed in real life". RESULTS: Using 10 Fr SCA the PFOI was 2.12 ± 0.58 Newton (N) (range:1.48-3.48) while 8 Fr SCA showed a PFOI 5.76 ± 0.96 N (range:4.05-7.35). Six of the experts, said they would stop proceeding when they reached above 5.1 N. Three experts had PFOI < 5.1 N and the other 4 stated they would go with PFOIs of 5.88, 6.16, 6.69 and 7.35 N when using SCA of 8 Fr.The highest load they would stop proceeding had a PFOI of 6.09 ± 1.87 N (range: 2.53-10.74). CONCLUSION: The PFOI threshold for ureteral damage inserting UAS of the experts is variable. Although FOI is a subjective perception, experience suggests that ureteral injury may occur at an average of 6.05 N perceived by surgeons' tactile feedback. In-vivo measurement of UAS PFOI may confirm a threshold.

Comparison of novel flexible and traditional ureteral access sheath in retrograde intrarenal surgery.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficiency and safety of a novel flexible ureteral access sheath (f-UAS) and traditional ureteral access sheath (UAS) during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 2022 and September 2022, a total of 152 consecutive cases with renal stones underwent RIRS with the f-UAS. Their outcomes were compared with those of another 152 consecutive cases undergoing RIRS with traditional UAS using a 1:1 scenario matched-pair analysis, with matching parameters including age and stone size. The f-UAS is a novel UAS with a 10-cm-long tube at the tip that can follow the bends of flexible ureteroscope (f-URS). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were found to be similar between the two groups. The f-UAS group demonstrated significantly higher SFR (76.3% vs. 7.2%; P < 0.001) at 1 day postoperatively and a higher clearance rate of stone volume (98.11% vs. 91.78%; P < 0.001). The f-UAS group also had lower total complications rate (9.9% vs. 22.4%; P = 0.003), lower incidence of fever (5.9% vs 11.9%; P = 0.001), shorter operative times (56.5 min vs. 59.9 min; P = 0.047), and lower usage rate of baskets (17.1% vs. 100%; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in SFR at 1 month postoperatively (P = 0.627) and in the length of postoperative hospital stay between the two groups (P = 0.225). CONCLUSION: Compared to the traditional UAS during RIRS, the f-UAS showed several advantages, including higher SFR at 1 day postoperatively, shorter operative times, lower incidence of complications, and less use of basket.

Clinical study of UMP and RIRS in 1.0-2.0 cm diameter renal/upper ureteral calculi.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of Ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMP) and Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for renal/upper ureteral calculi in 1.0-2.0 cm diameter. METHODS: From October 2017 to October 2022, the surgical treatment of patients with renal/upper ureteral calculi in 1.0-2.0 cm diameter who were admitted to our hospital was retrospectively analyzed. They were divided into two groups, the UMP group (sixty-two cases) and the RIRS group (one hundred and nine cases), according to the different surgical methods. Baseline data includes general information, stone size, location, CT value, hydronephrosis, creatinine level, etc. RESULTS: Intraoperative blood loss was 33.6 ± 8.5 ml in the UMP group was significantly more than 4.3 ± 0.7 ml in the RIRS group (P < 0.05). Intraoperative renal pelvis pressure of UMP group 10.5 ± 1.3 mmHg was significantly lower than RIRS group 23.6 ± 5.6 mmHg (P < 0.05). The incidence of postoperative infection was higher in the RIRS group (thirteen cases [11.93%]), and one case ([1.61%]) in the UMP group (P < 0.05). Routine CT scans on the second day and two months after surgery showed that the stone clearance rates in the UMP group were 87.1% and 93.5%, respectively, higher than those in the RIRS group (69.7% and 79.8%, respectively; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: UMP has the advantage of a higher stone-free rate but a higher risk of injury and bleeding. The advantages of RIRS include less trauma, less bleeding, and faster recovery, but lower stone-free rates and a higher risk of infection.

Fluid dynamics within renal cavities during endoscopic stone surgery: does the position of the flexible ureteroscope and ureteral access sheath affect the outflow rate?

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of ureteroscope position within renal cavities as well as different locations of the tip of the ureteral access sheath (UAS) on fluid dynamics during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective observational clinical study was performed. Measurements with a flexible ureteroscope placed in the upper, middle and lower calyces were obtained with the tip of the UAS placed either 2 cm below the pyelo-ureteric junction (PUJ), or at the level of the iliac crest. RESULTS: 74 patients were included. The outflow rates from the middle and upper calyxes were statistically significantly higher compared to the lower calyx, both with the UAS close to the pyelo-ureteric junction and at the iliac crest. When the UAS was withdrawn and positioned at the level of the iliac crest, a significant decrease in outflow rates from the upper (40.1 ± 4.3 ml/min vs 35.8 ± 4.1 ml/min) and middle calyces (40.6 ± 4.0 ml/min vs 36.8 ± 4.6 ml/min) and an increase in the outflow from the lower calyx (28.5 ± 3.3 ml/min vs 33.7 ± 5.7 ml/min) were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that higher fluid outflow rates are observed from upper and middle calyces compared to lower calyx. This was true when the UAS was positioned 2 cm below the PUJ and at the iliac crest. Significant worsening of fluid dynamics from upper and middle calyces was observed when the UAS was placed distally at the level of the iliac crest. While the difference was statistically significant, the absolute change was not significant. In contrast, for lower calyces, a statistically significant improvement was documented.

Endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery composed of micro-perc and retrograde intrarenal surgery in the treatment of complex kidney stones in children.

OBJECTIVE: This research aims to explore the efficiency and safety of endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery (Micro-ECIRS) composed of micro-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (Micro-perc) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in the Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia (GMSV) position for a single session for the treatment of complex nephrolithiasis in children. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed patients aged < 18 years who underwent Micro-ECIRS in the GMSV position for renal stones larger than 2 cm under ultrasound guidance between August 2020 to May 2022 at our institution. RESULTS: A total of 13 patients (8 males and 5 females) received Micro-ECIRS for renal stones under ultrasound guidancewhile adopting the GMSV position. The average stone size was 2.7 cm (range: 2.1-3.7 cm). Among them, 6 patients had left kidney stones, 5 patients had right kidney stones, and 2 patients had bilateral kidney stones. The mean operative time was 70.5 min (range: 54-93 min). The mean hospital stay was 6.4 days (range: 4-9 days). The mean hemoglobin decrease was 8.2 g/L (range: 5.1-12.4 g/L). The total number of kidneys that had complete stone clearance was 8 kidneys at 48 h postoperatively, 11 kidneys at 2 weeks postoperatively, and 14 kidneys at 1 month postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that Micro-ECIRS while patients are in the GMSV position is a safe and effective method for the treatment of complex children nephrolithiasis. However, all children made three hospital visits and received anesthesia three times. Further research is needed to confirm these findings.

Comparison of two methods for treatment of 1-2 cm kidney stones in pediatric patients: mini PCNL and RIRS.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the results of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) for the treatment of 1-2 cm kidney stones in pediatric patients. METHODS: The records of patients under the age of 18 years who were diagnosed with unilateral 1-2 cm kidney stones for the first time and underwent endoscopic surgery between February 2008 and April 2022 were retrospectively examined. The patients were divided into two groups: mini-PCNL and RIRS surgery. Parameters such as age, gender, number of stones, side, size and localization were examined. The main endpoint of the study was to compare stone-free rates (SFR) one month after both surgeries. Surgery and fluoroscopy times, postoperative hospital stay, hemoglobin decrease and complication rates were compared between the groups. SFR was evaluated one month after surgery by direct urinary system radiography and USG or CT. RESULTS: A total of 58 patients were included in the study. There were 35 patients in the mini-PCNL group and 23 patients in the RIRS group. Table 1 shows the demographic and clinical characteristics of both groups. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of age, gender, stone size, location, side and density. Calcium oxalate stones were observed at a higher rate in both groups. Mean fluoroscopy time was higher in the mini-PCNL group (p = 0.001). The mean surgery time was lower in the mini-PCNL group (p = 0.024). The mean hemoglobin decrease was greater in the percutaneous group (p = 0.039). There were no differences between the groups in terms of postoperative hospital stay, complication rates, and SFR one month after surgery. CONCLUSION: Although mini-PCNL seems to be more advantageous in terms of operation time compared to RIRS, it is disadvantageous in terms of average fluoroscopy time, radiation received and average hemoglobin decrease.