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.

The efficacy of early extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for the treatment of 5 to 10 mm upper ureteral stones: An observational study.

This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) performed in the early period (within the first 24 hours). Data of patients who underwent SWL with a diagnosis of unilateral radiopaque 5 to 10 mm upper ureteral stones were retrospectively examined. Patients were divided into 2 groups. Group 1 (early SWL) consisted of patients with SWL performed within 24 hours after the onset of colic pain (<24 hours), while group 2 (deferred SWL) comprised patients with SWL performed 24 hours or more from the onset of pain (≥24 hours). The primary endpoint of the study was planned to determine 1-month SFR in both groups. The secondary endpoint was determined to be the factor affecting SWL success. The mean age of 216 patients (130 men, 86 women) included in this study was 46.5 ±â€…12.1 years. SFR within 1 month was detected in 175 patients (81%). In the early SWL group, the average number of SWL sessions was fewer (1.26 vs 1.83 P = .026) and the time to the stone-free state was shorter (11 vs 15.4 days P = .044). SFR within 1 month was higher in the early SWL group (85.5% vs 71.8% P = .036). In multivariate analysis, stone size, Hounsfield Units, and early SWL were predictive factors for SWL success. Performing SWL within the first 24 hours is highly effective in patients with symptomatic 5 to 10 mm upper ureteral stones.

Comparison of two percutaneous nephrolithotomy methods for the treatment of pediatric kidney stones: mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, the aim was to compare the results of mini and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for the treatment of pediatric kidney stones. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data for 128 patients < 18 years of age who underwent mini and standard PCNL due to pediatric kidney stones were retrospectively examined. Patients were divided into two groups: mini-PCNL (16-20 Fr) and standard PCNL (26 Fr). Surgery time, number of punctures to the pelvicalyceal system, hospital stay, postoperative hemoglobin drop, complications and stone-free status (SFR) were compared between the groups. Additional surgical intervention (double-J stent, ureterorenoscopy, secondary PCNL) performed after the surgery was recorded. The absence of residual stones or < 3 mm residual stones on kidney, ureter and bladder radiography (KUB) and ultrasonography (USG) performed in the third postoperative month were accepted as success criteria. RESULTS: There were 32 (43.8%) patients in the mini-PCNL group and 41 (56.2%) patients in the standard PCNL group. The mean age was 9.3 ± 4.1 years in the mini-PCNL group and 10.1 ± 5.4 years in the standard PCNL group. Mean stone size in the mini-PCNL group was 2.1 ± 1.2; while for standard PCNL it was 2.3 ± 1.4. The mean surgery time was statistically significantly higher in the mini-PCNL group (p = 0.005). There was no difference between the groups in terms of intraoperative double J stent use, postoperative complications and SFR. A double J stent was inserted in two patients in the mini-PCNL group and in one patient in the standard PCNL group due to urine leakage from the nephrostomy tract in the postoperative period. Although the postoperative hemoglobin drop was found to be significantly higher in standard PCNL (p = 0.001), hematuria and blood transfusion rates were low in both groups. Mean hospital stay was shorter in the mini-PCNL group compared to standard PCNL (3.6 ± 1.2 days vs. 2.5 ± 1.1; p = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Although mini-PCNL has longer surgery time compared to standard PCNL, it should be preferred for the treatment of pediatric kidney stones due to advantages such as similar success and complication rates to standard PCNL, short hospital stay and less postoperative hemoglobin drop.

Hydronephrosis Due to Intraureteral Migration of Missed Intrauterine Device.

Migration of intrauterine devices (IUDs) to the ureter causing ureteral obstruction is an extremely rare event. A 45-year-old female patient was admitted to our hospital with a complaint of pain in the right flank and inferior right quadrant of the abdomen. On genitourinary system ultrasonography, grade 3 hydronephrosis was found in the right kidney. On the abdominopelvic radiography, there was an appearance consistent with two IUDs, one in the region consistent with the course of the right distal ureter and the other in the usual localisation. The first IUD was thought to have spontaneously detached from the uterus, so a second IUD was implanted. A right-sided extravesical ureteroneocystostomy (Lich-Gregoir) operation was performed. The operation was terminated with the placement of a 4.8 French, 26 cm double-J stent in the ureter. The patient was followed up in our hospital for 26 months and she was asymptomatic during follow-up, hydronephrosis was resolved completely, and no complications were encountered during follow-up clinical and ultrasonography examinations.

Which Method Is More Effective for the Treatment of 1-2 cm Renal Pelvis Stones in Obese Patients: Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy or Flexible Ureterorenoscopy?

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and complications of obese patients who underwent extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and flexible ureterorenoscopy (FURS) for treating 1-2 cm renal pelvic stones. METHODS: This study included 89 patients with a body mass index (BMI) >30 who underwent ESWL and FURS surgeries for 10-20 mm renal pelvic stones between January 2015 and July 2023. Three months after the treatments, patients underwent full abdominal computed tomography (CT) and were examined for stone-free status and the presence of residual stones. The presence of ≥4 mm residual stones on imaging was considered a failure, and these patients were treated again. Demographic data, stone characteristics, stone-free rate (SFR) three months after the procedure, surgery/procedure time, and complications such as bleeding, urosepsis, and collecting system perforation were compared between the groups. RESULTS: The patients included in the study were divided into two groups: ESWL (n=46) and FURS (n=43). Demographic and clinical data were similar between the groups. Retreatment rates were higher in the ESWL group compared to the FURS group. The mean procedure time was similar between the groups (p=0.085). The three-month SFR was found to be higher in the FURS group (88.3% vs. 73.9%; p=0.043). There was no difference in complication rates between groups. CONCLUSION: FURS is a more effective treatment method than ESWL in obese patients with stones 1-2 cm in size located in the renal pelvis.