The "all-seeing needle" micro-PCNL versus flexible ureterorenoscopy for lower calyceal stones of ≤ 2 cm
Kehua Jiang1,2, Hongbo Chen2, Xiao Yu1
1Department of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430030, China.
Abstract:
The objectives of the study are to compare the safety and efficacy of "all-seeing needle" optical puncture system micro-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (micro-PCNL) and flexible ureterorenoscopy (FURS) for the treatment of lower calyceal stones of ≤ 2 cm and to determine the advantages and disadvantages of each. 116 patients in total with lower calyceal stones of ≤ 2 cm were randomly divided into two equal groups, "all-seeing needle" optical puncture system micro-PCNL and FURS. In both groups, holmium laser was utilized for lithotripsy. The perioperative parameters were compared between the two groups. Compared to the "all-seeing needle" micro-PCNL group, the mean operative time was significantly longer in the FURS group (P = 0.000). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups with respect to mean hemoglobin reduction (P = 0.087), complications (P = 0.731) and LOS (P = 0.856). The overall SFR of the "all-seeing needle" micro-PCNL group and FURS group was 84.5% (49/58) and 79.3% (46/58), respectively, without any significant difference between the groups (P = 0.469). For treating lower calyceal stones of ≤ 2 cm, the "all-seeing needle" micro-PCNL group had shorter operative time than FURS, while no significant differences between the two groups with respect to mean hemoglobin reduction, complications, LOS and SFR were found.
Related Concept Videos
Acute Pyelonephritis II: Diagnostic Studies and Management
Urinary Tract Calculi III: Medical Management
Urinary Tract Calculi V: Nursing Management
Urinary Tract Calculi VI: Surgical Management
Imaging Studies V: Intravenous Urography and Retrograde Pyelography
Urologic Endoscopic Procedure: Cystoscopic Examination


