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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Urologia internationalis 2013-01, Vol.91 (3), p.345-349
Hauptverfasser: Ozturk, Ufuk, Sener, Nevzat Can, Goktug, H.N. Goksel, Nalbant, Ismail, Gucuk, Adnan, Imamoglu, M. Abdurrahim
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 &lt; 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 &lt; 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 &lt; 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 &lt; 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 &lt; 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 &lt; 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