Comparison of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy, Shock Wave Lithotripsy, and Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Lower Pole Renal Calculi 10-20 mm
Objective: To compare the results of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), shock wave lithotripsy (SWL), and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for 1- to 2-cm lower pole kidney stones. Patients and Methods: This retrospective study was based on data collected from the files of patients between Janu...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Urologia internationalis 2013-01, Vol.91 (3), p.345-349 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 349 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 345 |
container_title | Urologia internationalis |
container_volume | 91 |
creator | Ozturk, Ufuk Sener, Nevzat Can Goktug, H.N. Goksel Nalbant, Ismail Gucuk, Adnan Imamoglu, M. Abdurrahim |
description | Objective: To compare the results of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), shock wave lithotripsy (SWL), and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for 1- to 2-cm lower pole kidney stones. Patients and Methods: This retrospective study was based on data collected from the files of patients between January 2007 and May 2012. The files of 383 patients (221 SWL, 144 PCNL, 38 RIRS) were evaluated. The groups were compared for stone size, success rate, and complication rate using the modified Clavien grading system. Results: The stone burdens of the groups were similar (p = 0.36). The success rates were 76, 94, and 73%, respectively, in SWL, PCNL, and RIRS. The highest stone-free rate was in the PNL group (p < 0.05). When the complication rates were evaluated using the Clavien grading system, they were determined to be 13% in PCNL, 3% in SWL, and 5% in RIRS. Especially GII and GIII complications were more common in the PCNL group (p < 0.05). Conclusion: PCNL seems to be the most successful but most invasive method. However, with relatively low complication rates, SWL and RIRS are other techniques to keep in mind. To determine the first-line treatment, prospective randomized studies with larger series are needed. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1159/000351136 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_karge</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_karger_primary_351136</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1443422261</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-dd9f2ed5f1fde9e7c6399922c09484d7d52af8144d555ec237b653410ad364db3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpt0E9v0zAYBnALDbFucNgdTZa4DImA_ybNEVVsVKrGxJh2jFz79RqWxOF1sqmfgS-NS0pPnCw9_vm13oeQM84-cq7LT4wxqTmX-Qsy40rIjMmyPCIzxpTIUj4_Jicx_mQs4bJ4RY6FnPNcF3JGfi9C2xusY-ho8PQG0I6D6SCMkV5Dv8HQ1MMmDKHdfqC3m2Af6b15Arr6m2Ldx5SbztHvMGB4QOOALrsBDUJnGno74gPglvqAdBWeAelNaCDh3eXCNHZsaspZJhht29fkpTdNhDf785TcXX75sfiarb5dLRefV5lVjA2Zc6UX4LTn3kEJhc3TtqUQlpVqrlzhtDB-zpVyWmuwQhbrXEvFmXEyV24tT8nFNLfH8GuEOFRtHS00zbR3lZ5KJYTIeaLvJ2oxxIjgqx7r1uC24qzadV8duk_2fD92XLfgDvJf2Qm8m8Cj2bVyAHfL62lE1Tuf1Nv_qv0vfwDdk5QW</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1443422261</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy, Shock Wave Lithotripsy, and Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Lower Pole Renal Calculi 10-20 mm</title><source>Karger Journals</source><source>MEDLINE</source><creator>Ozturk, Ufuk ; Sener, Nevzat Can ; Goktug, H.N. Goksel ; Nalbant, Ismail ; Gucuk, Adnan ; Imamoglu, M. Abdurrahim</creator><creatorcontrib>Ozturk, Ufuk ; Sener, Nevzat Can ; Goktug, H.N. Goksel ; Nalbant, Ismail ; Gucuk, Adnan ; Imamoglu, M. Abdurrahim</creatorcontrib><description>Objective: To compare the results of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), shock wave lithotripsy (SWL), and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for 1- to 2-cm lower pole kidney stones. Patients and Methods: This retrospective study was based on data collected from the files of patients between January 2007 and May 2012. The files of 383 patients (221 SWL, 144 PCNL, 38 RIRS) were evaluated. The groups were compared for stone size, success rate, and complication rate using the modified Clavien grading system. Results: The stone burdens of the groups were similar (p = 0.36). The success rates were 76, 94, and 73%, respectively, in SWL, PCNL, and RIRS. The highest stone-free rate was in the PNL group (p < 0.05). When the complication rates were evaluated using the Clavien grading system, they were determined to be 13% in PCNL, 3% in SWL, and 5% in RIRS. Especially GII and GIII complications were more common in the PCNL group (p < 0.05). Conclusion: PCNL seems to be the most successful but most invasive method. However, with relatively low complication rates, SWL and RIRS are other techniques to keep in mind. To determine the first-line treatment, prospective randomized studies with larger series are needed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0042-1138</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1423-0399</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1159/000351136</identifier><identifier>PMID: 23816573</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel, Switzerland</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Female ; Humans ; Kidney - surgery ; Kidney Calculi - surgery ; Kidney Calculi - therapy ; Lithotripsy - methods ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Nephrostomy, Percutaneous - methods ; Original Paper ; Retrospective Studies ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed ; Treatment Outcome ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Urologia internationalis, 2013-01, Vol.91 (3), p.345-349</ispartof><rights>2013 S. Karger AG, Basel</rights><rights>Copyright © 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-dd9f2ed5f1fde9e7c6399922c09484d7d52af8144d555ec237b653410ad364db3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-dd9f2ed5f1fde9e7c6399922c09484d7d52af8144d555ec237b653410ad364db3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,2423,27905,27906</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23816573$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ozturk, Ufuk</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sener, Nevzat Can</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goktug, H.N. Goksel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nalbant, Ismail</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gucuk, Adnan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Imamoglu, M. Abdurrahim</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy, Shock Wave Lithotripsy, and Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Lower Pole Renal Calculi 10-20 mm</title><title>Urologia internationalis</title><addtitle>Urol Int</addtitle><description>Objective: To compare the results of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), shock wave lithotripsy (SWL), and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for 1- to 2-cm lower pole kidney stones. Patients and Methods: This retrospective study was based on data collected from the files of patients between January 2007 and May 2012. The files of 383 patients (221 SWL, 144 PCNL, 38 RIRS) were evaluated. The groups were compared for stone size, success rate, and complication rate using the modified Clavien grading system. Results: The stone burdens of the groups were similar (p = 0.36). The success rates were 76, 94, and 73%, respectively, in SWL, PCNL, and RIRS. The highest stone-free rate was in the PNL group (p < 0.05). When the complication rates were evaluated using the Clavien grading system, they were determined to be 13% in PCNL, 3% in SWL, and 5% in RIRS. Especially GII and GIII complications were more common in the PCNL group (p < 0.05). Conclusion: PCNL seems to be the most successful but most invasive method. However, with relatively low complication rates, SWL and RIRS are other techniques to keep in mind. To determine the first-line treatment, prospective randomized studies with larger series are needed.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Kidney - surgery</subject><subject>Kidney Calculi - surgery</subject><subject>Kidney Calculi - therapy</subject><subject>Lithotripsy - methods</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Nephrostomy, Percutaneous - methods</subject><subject>Original Paper</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0042-1138</issn><issn>1423-0399</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpt0E9v0zAYBnALDbFucNgdTZa4DImA_ybNEVVsVKrGxJh2jFz79RqWxOF1sqmfgS-NS0pPnCw9_vm13oeQM84-cq7LT4wxqTmX-Qsy40rIjMmyPCIzxpTIUj4_Jicx_mQs4bJ4RY6FnPNcF3JGfi9C2xusY-ho8PQG0I6D6SCMkV5Dv8HQ1MMmDKHdfqC3m2Af6b15Arr6m2Ldx5SbztHvMGB4QOOALrsBDUJnGno74gPglvqAdBWeAelNaCDh3eXCNHZsaspZJhht29fkpTdNhDf785TcXX75sfiarb5dLRefV5lVjA2Zc6UX4LTn3kEJhc3TtqUQlpVqrlzhtDB-zpVyWmuwQhbrXEvFmXEyV24tT8nFNLfH8GuEOFRtHS00zbR3lZ5KJYTIeaLvJ2oxxIjgqx7r1uC24qzadV8duk_2fD92XLfgDvJf2Qm8m8Cj2bVyAHfL62lE1Tuf1Nv_qv0vfwDdk5QW</recordid><startdate>20130101</startdate><enddate>20130101</enddate><creator>Ozturk, Ufuk</creator><creator>Sener, Nevzat Can</creator><creator>Goktug, H.N. Goksel</creator><creator>Nalbant, Ismail</creator><creator>Gucuk, Adnan</creator><creator>Imamoglu, M. Abdurrahim</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130101</creationdate><title>Comparison of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy, Shock Wave Lithotripsy, and Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Lower Pole Renal Calculi 10-20 mm</title><author>Ozturk, Ufuk ; Sener, Nevzat Can ; Goktug, H.N. Goksel ; Nalbant, Ismail ; Gucuk, Adnan ; Imamoglu, M. Abdurrahim</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-dd9f2ed5f1fde9e7c6399922c09484d7d52af8144d555ec237b653410ad364db3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Kidney - surgery</topic><topic>Kidney Calculi - surgery</topic><topic>Kidney Calculi - therapy</topic><topic>Lithotripsy - methods</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Nephrostomy, Percutaneous - methods</topic><topic>Original Paper</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ozturk, Ufuk</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sener, Nevzat Can</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goktug, H.N. Goksel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nalbant, Ismail</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gucuk, Adnan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Imamoglu, M. Abdurrahim</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Urologia internationalis</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ozturk, Ufuk</au><au>Sener, Nevzat Can</au><au>Goktug, H.N. Goksel</au><au>Nalbant, Ismail</au><au>Gucuk, Adnan</au><au>Imamoglu, M. Abdurrahim</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy, Shock Wave Lithotripsy, and Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Lower Pole Renal Calculi 10-20 mm</atitle><jtitle>Urologia internationalis</jtitle><addtitle>Urol Int</addtitle><date>2013-01-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>91</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>345</spage><epage>349</epage><pages>345-349</pages><issn>0042-1138</issn><eissn>1423-0399</eissn><abstract>Objective: To compare the results of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), shock wave lithotripsy (SWL), and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for 1- to 2-cm lower pole kidney stones. Patients and Methods: This retrospective study was based on data collected from the files of patients between January 2007 and May 2012. The files of 383 patients (221 SWL, 144 PCNL, 38 RIRS) were evaluated. The groups were compared for stone size, success rate, and complication rate using the modified Clavien grading system. Results: The stone burdens of the groups were similar (p = 0.36). The success rates were 76, 94, and 73%, respectively, in SWL, PCNL, and RIRS. The highest stone-free rate was in the PNL group (p < 0.05). When the complication rates were evaluated using the Clavien grading system, they were determined to be 13% in PCNL, 3% in SWL, and 5% in RIRS. Especially GII and GIII complications were more common in the PCNL group (p < 0.05). Conclusion: PCNL seems to be the most successful but most invasive method. However, with relatively low complication rates, SWL and RIRS are other techniques to keep in mind. To determine the first-line treatment, prospective randomized studies with larger series are needed.</abstract><cop>Basel, Switzerland</cop><pmid>23816573</pmid><doi>10.1159/000351136</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0042-1138 |
ispartof | Urologia internationalis, 2013-01, Vol.91 (3), p.345-349 |
issn | 0042-1138 1423-0399 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_karger_primary_351136 |
source | Karger Journals; MEDLINE |
subjects | Adolescent Adult Aged Female Humans Kidney - surgery Kidney Calculi - surgery Kidney Calculi - therapy Lithotripsy - methods Male Middle Aged Nephrostomy, Percutaneous - methods Original Paper Retrospective Studies Tomography, X-Ray Computed Treatment Outcome Young Adult |
title | Comparison of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy, Shock Wave Lithotripsy, and Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Lower Pole Renal Calculi 10-20 mm |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T18%3A49%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_karge&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20Percutaneous%20Nephrolithotomy,%20Shock%20Wave%20Lithotripsy,%20and%20Retrograde%20Intrarenal%20Surgery%20for%20Lower%20Pole%20Renal%20Calculi%2010-20%20mm&rft.jtitle=Urologia%20internationalis&rft.au=Ozturk,%20Ufuk&rft.date=2013-01-01&rft.volume=91&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=345&rft.epage=349&rft.pages=345-349&rft.issn=0042-1138&rft.eissn=1423-0399&rft_id=info:doi/10.1159/000351136&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_karge%3E1443422261%3C/proquest_karge%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1443422261&rft_id=info:pmid/23816573&rfr_iscdi=true |