Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Ureteroscopy vs laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for large proximal ureteric stone: a randomised trial.
Torricelli, Fabio C M; Srougi, Victor; Marchini, Giovanni S; Vicentini, Fabio C; Batagello, Carlos A; Danilovic, Alexandre; Arap, Marco A; Andrade, Hiury; Mitre, Anuar I; Jordão, Ricardo D; Monga, Manoj; Nahas, William C; Mazzucchi, Eduardo.
Affiliation
  • Torricelli FCM; Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Sao Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Srougi V; Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Sao Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Marchini GS; Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Sao Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Vicentini FC; Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Sao Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Batagello CA; Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Sao Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Danilovic A; Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Sao Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Arap MA; Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Sao Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Andrade H; Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Sao Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Mitre AI; Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Sao Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Jordão RD; Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Sao Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Monga M; University of San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
  • Nahas WC; Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Sao Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Mazzucchi E; Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Sao Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
BJU Int ; 2024 Jul 31.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39082627
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

To compare the outcomes of retrograde flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) with retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (RLU) for large proximal ureteric stones. PATIENTS AND

METHODS:

A prospective randomised trial was conducted from January 2018 through December 2022 including patients with impacted proximal ureteric stones of 15-25 mm. Patients underwent fURS or RLU. Primary outcome was the stone-free rate. Demographic data, stone features, and complications rates were also compared between groups.

RESULTS:

A total of 64 patients were enrolled, 32 in each group. The mean impacted stone time was similar between groups, as well as stone size (17 mm) and stone density (>1000 Hounsfield Units). The ureteric stone-free rates between the two groups (93.7% in fURS vs 96.8% in RLU; odds ratio [OR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.72 to 3.17; P = 0.554), and overall success rates, which take into account residual fragments in the kidney (84.3% in fURS vs 93.7% in RLU; OR 1.02, 95% CI -0.69 to 2.74; P = 0.23), were similar. Operative time was also not statistically significantly different between groups (median 80 vs 82 min; P = 0.101). There was no difference in hospital length of stay. Retropulsion rate was higher with fURS (65.6% vs 3.1%; p < 0.001). Residual hydronephrosis (34.3% each group) and complication rates did no differ according to treatment.

CONCLUSION:

Flexible URS and RLU are both highly efficient and present low morbidity for large impacted proximal ureteric stone treatment. RLU is not superior to fURS.
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: BJU Int Journal subject: UROLOGIA Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Brasil Country of publication: Reino Unido

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: BJU Int Journal subject: UROLOGIA Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Brasil Country of publication: Reino Unido