Is mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy a safe alternative to extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy in pediatric age group in borderline stones? A randomized prospective study
World Journal of Urology Feb 19, 2018
Farouk A, et al. - This study entailed the assessment and comparison of the outcomes of the extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) for the treatment for renal stones in the pediatric population. It was determined that mini-PCNL was a safe procedure according to Clavien grade of complications. Following 3 sessions of ESWL, a similar stone-free rate with a lower retreatment rate was exhibited by the mini-PCNL. Nonetheless, the mini-PCNL presented with more radiation exposure and warranted a longer hospital stay
Methods
- Eligible candidates included 108 patients younger than 12 years of age with 1-2 cm single renal stone (pelvic or calyceal).
- They were randomly allocated into 2 groups, each containing 54 patients.
- Using 16.5 Fr percutaneous sheath, individuals in group A were subjected to mini-PCNL.
- On the other hand, patients in group B underwent ESWL using Dornier Compact Sigma.
Results
- As per the results, the stone-free rate (SFR) after first session was 88.9% (48 cases) and 55.6% (30 cases) for groups A and B, respectively.
- Findings exhibited a highly, statistically marked difference P= 0.006.
- It was determined that 2 patients (3.7%) in group A needed second session of PCNL, while 18 subjects (33.3%) in group B needed a second session, of theses 18 patients six patients needed a third session of ESWL.
- Following the third session of ESWL and second look PCNL, it was noted that the stone-free rates were 92.59% (50 cases) and 88.89% (48 cases) for groups A and B, respectively, (P=0.639), which appeared to be statistically insignificant.
- A considerably longer mean hospital stay and fluoroscopy exposure were demonstrated in the mini-PCNL group.
- It was inferred that the complication rate in groups A and group B were (22.2%) and (14.8%), respectively, which was statistically insignificant (P=0.484).
Only Doctors with an M3 India account can read this article. Sign up for free or login with your existing account.
4 reasons why Doctors love M3 India
-
Exclusive Write-ups & Webinars by KOLs
-
Daily Quiz by specialty
-
Paid Market Research Surveys
-
Case discussions, News & Journals' summaries