Publication:
What is the ideal treatment for 20-30 mm kidney stones? Comparative outcomes of 1197 patients

dc.contributor.coauthorIbis, Muhammed Arif
dc.contributor.coauthorGokce, Mehmet Ilker
dc.contributor.coauthorGoekhan, Okan
dc.contributor.coauthorKaragoz, Mehmet Ali
dc.contributor.coauthorYitgin, Yasin
dc.contributor.coauthorBabayigit, Muammer
dc.contributor.coauthorBoeyuek, Abubekir
dc.contributor.coauthorVerep, Samed
dc.contributor.coauthorTefik, Tzevat
dc.contributor.coauthorSenocak, Cagri
dc.contributor.coauthorGuven, Selcuk
dc.contributor.coauthorSarica, Kemal
dc.contributor.departmentSchool of Medicine
dc.contributor.kuauthorKiremit, Murat Can
dc.contributor.schoolcollegeinstituteSCHOOL OF MEDICINE
dc.date.accessioned2024-11-09T23:07:48Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.description.abstractBackground: The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPNL), and standard-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (stPNL) for the treatment of 20-30 mm kidney stones.Methods: The records of 1197 patients (SWL = 149, RIRS = 205, mPNL = 525, and stPNL = 318) from 8 centers were reviewed retrospectively. Four procedures were compared for stone-free rates (SFRs), auxiliary treatment, and associated complications.Results: Initial SFRs were 43.6%, 54.6%, 86.7%, and 87.7% in SWL, RIRS, mPNL, and stPNL, respectively (P < .001), whereas the final SFRs were 71.8%, 80%, 90.5%, and 89.6% (P < .001). The rate of auxiliary treatment in the groups was 38.3%, 26.8%, 5%, and 4.4%, respectively (P < .001). The initial and final SFRs in the mPNL and stPNL groups were higher than those in SWL and RIRS groups (P < .001). The rate for auxiliary treatment was lower in the mPNL and stPNL groups (P < .001). The operation time was longer in the RIRS group (P = .005). According to the Clavien-Dindo classification, the complication rate in the SWL group was lower than that in the surgical approaches (P < .001); however, no statistical difference was detected between RIRS, mPNL, and stPNL groups. mPNL and stPNL had a higher success rate than RIRS or SWL for treating 20-30 mm kidney stones.Conclusion: In the treatment of 2-3 cm renal stones, RIRS and PNL were more effective than SWL to obtain a better SFR and less auxiliary treatment rate. Compared with RIRS, mPNL and stPNL provided a higher SFR with similar complication rates.
dc.description.indexedbyWOS
dc.description.indexedbyScopus
dc.description.indexedbyPubMed
dc.description.openaccessNO
dc.description.publisherscopeInternational
dc.description.sponsoredbyTubitakEuN/A
dc.identifier.doi10.1089/lap.2022.0513
dc.identifier.eissn1557-9034
dc.identifier.issn1092-6429
dc.identifier.quartileQ4
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85163913551
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2022.0513
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14288/9206
dc.identifier.wos944714000001
dc.keywordsComplication rates
dc.keywordsExtracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy
dc.keywordsMini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy
dc.keywordsRetrograde intrarenal surgery
dc.keywordsStandard-percutaneous nephrolithotomy
dc.keywordsStone-free rates
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherMary Ann Liebert, Inc.
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques
dc.subjectSurgery
dc.titleWhat is the ideal treatment for 20-30 mm kidney stones? Comparative outcomes of 1197 patients
dc.typeJournal Article
dspace.entity.typePublication
local.contributor.kuauthorKiremit, Murat Can
local.publication.orgunit1SCHOOL OF MEDICINE
local.publication.orgunit2School of Medicine
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublicationd02929e1-2a70-44f0-ae17-7819f587bedd
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscoveryd02929e1-2a70-44f0-ae17-7819f587bedd
relation.isParentOrgUnitOfPublication17f2dc8e-6e54-4fa8-b5e0-d6415123a93e
relation.isParentOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscovery17f2dc8e-6e54-4fa8-b5e0-d6415123a93e

Files