The role of super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SMP) in the treatment of symptomatic lower pole renal stones (LPSs) after the failure of shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS).

To assess the safety and efficacy of super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SMP) in the treatment of symptomatic lower pole renal stones (LPSs) after the failure of shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), we retrospectively evaluated 44 patients with symptomatic LPSs with previously failed SWL or RIRS and consequently underwent SMP from October 2014 to March 2016. The percutaneous renal access was performed 12-14F with C-arm fluoroscopy or ultrasonographic guidance. Stone disintegration was performed using either Holmium laser or pneumatic lithotripter. Perioperative parameters along with operations were assessed in detail. A total of 44 patients (mean age 49.1 ± 13.7 years) were included in the study. Stone size was 18.4 ± 6.0 mm (range 9-29), operative time was 63.9 ± 32.7 min (range 14-145) and hospital stay was 2.8 ± 1.2 days (range 1-5). The hemoglobin drop was 12.4 ± 8.8 g/L (range 0-31), and no patients required blood transfusion. Complete stone-free status was achieved in 40 (90.9%) patients. Clinically insignificant residual fragments were observed in three (6.8%) patients and only one (2.3%) patient had a 6 mm residual calculus. A total of three minor complications (urinary tract infection, hemorrhage resolved by hemostatics and renal colic requiring analgesics) were observed postoperatively. For symptomatic LPSs after the failure of SWL or RIRS, SMP is a safe and efficient auxiliary option and even might be an alternative to SWL or RIRS, while further considering the stone-free rates and stone-related events.

Thulium (Tm:YAG) laser vaporesection of prostate and bipolar transurethral resection of prostate in patients with benign prostate hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Thulium laser vaporesection (ThuVARP) and bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (B-TURP) are novel surgeries for benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH). This paper is a systematic review and analysis of literatures comparing efficacy indicators, operative parameters, as well as safety indicators between ThuVARP and B-TURP for the treatment of BPH. A systematic search of electronic databases, including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, and China National Knowledge Internet (CNKI), was carried out up to December 1, 2015 (updated on March 1, 2016). The captivating outcomes included basic clinical characteristics, perioperative parameters, local complications, and efficacy indicators which included International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), maximum flow rate (Qmax), and postvoid residual (PVR). After assessing the quality of methodology and extracting data, a meta-analysis was carried out by using STATA 12.0 software. Five studies involving 500 patients met the standard. The outcomes of this analysis were as follows: (a) efficacy indicators: there were no significant differences in IPSS, QoL, PVR, and Qmax between the two groups (all P > 0.05); (b) perioperative indicators: ThuVARP had longer operative time [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.843; 95% confidence interval (CI) - 0.391, 1.296; P < 0.001] but less serum hemoglobin decreased (SMD = - 0.561; 95% CI - 0.796, - 0.327; P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (SMD = - 1.558; 95% CI - 2.709, - 0.407; P < 0.01), and catheterization time (SMD = - 1.274; 95% CI - 2.158, - 0.390; P < 0.01). Additionally, no significant difference was found in estimated resected weight (P > 0.05); (c) safety indicators: no significant difference was found in local complication rates (all P > 0.05) between ThuVARP and B-TURP. In our analysis, there exists no statistical difference between ThuVARP and B-TURP group in efficacy. However, in spite of requiring longer surgical time, ThuVARP was better in terms of less blood loss as well as shorter hospitalization and catheterization time.