A study on comparative outcomes of totally ultrasonography-guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy in prone versus flank position: a randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: The percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) has become the gold-standard for treating patients with the larger renal stones and staghorn calculi. This study was designed to evaluate the outcomes of flank versus prone position in patients underwent ultrasonic-guided PCNL for treatment of large kidney stones. METHODS: This prospective randomized clinical trial was conducted from September 2017 to September 2019 in the department of Urology, Labbafinejad University hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Two hundred patients with kidney stones larger than 2 cm underwent PCNLs in prone (n = 100) or flank position (n = 100). Success rate, operative time, access time, hemoglobin and creatinine changes, hospital stay, auxiliary procedure and surgical complications were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The two groups were similar in their baseline characteristics. The success rates in prone (87%) versus flank position (85%) were not significantly different at the first post-operative follow-up (p = 0.91). At the three-month follow-up, the overall stone free rates for the prone position PCNLs and flank position PCNLs were 94/100 (94%) and 90/100 (90%) (p = 0.96). There were no significant difference between the groups in operative time (p = 0.42), access time (p = 0.66), hemoglobin (p = 0.46) and creatinine (p = 0.22) changes, hospital stay (p = 0.05), auxiliary procedures (p = 0.75) and surgical complications. CONCLUSION: Overall, there is no significant difference between prone and flank positions in success rate and complications. More prospective studies must be carried out to identify patient populations who are most apt to benefit from one position over the other. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: IRCT20200902048597N1 DATE OF REGISTRATION: 2020-11-21, retrospectively registered.

Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Ultrasonic Versus Pneumatic Lithotripsy in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous nephrolitotomy (PCNL) is the preferred treatment for large renal stones. There is a need for more comparative data for different lithotripters used in PCNL. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the comparative safety and efficacy of ultrasonic and pneumatic lithotripsy in patients undergoing PCNL. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This randomized clinical trial was conducted at Labbafinejad University Hospital, Tehran, Iran. A total of 180 patients were selected and divided randomly into two groups: 88 patients to pneumatic and 92 to ultrasonic lithotripsy. INTERVENTION: Standard fluoroscopy-guided PCNL was performed using pneumatic or ultrasonic lithotripsy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was the procedure success rate. We also evaluated other outcome measures including operation time, stone fragmentation and removal time (SFRT), length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications. We used SPSS software version 18.0 for data analysis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The two groups were similar in baseline characteristics. There were no significant differences between the groups in stone fragmentation and removal time (p=0.63), stone free rate (p=0.44), and hospital stay (p=0.66). SFRT for hard stones was shorter using pneumatic lithotripsy (p<0.001). By contrast, ultrasonic lithotripsy was associated with a shorter SFRT for soft stones (p<0.001). Postoperative complications were similar in the two groups. A limitation of this study might be the 3-mo follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: In general, there were no significant differences in the success rate and complications between pneumatic and ultrasonic lithotripsy. SFRT was significantly shorter using pneumatic lithotripsy for hard stones, and ultrasonic lithotripsy for soft stones. PATIENT SUMMARY: We found no significant differences in the success rate and complications of percutaneous nephrolitotomy using pneumatic and ultrasonic lithotripsy. Ultrasonic and pneumatic lithotripsy differed in the time for stone fragmentation and removal for hard and soft stones.