Cargando…
Efficacy and safety of fURS in stones larger than 20 mm: is it still the threshold?
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this article was to evaluate the safety and efficiency of flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) in the management of renal calculi larger than 20 mm. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 92 cases with renal calculi were managed with fURS and divided into two groups depending on the size...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Polish Urological Association
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7203769/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32395324 http://dx.doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2020.0056 |
_version_ | 1783529930488807424 |
---|---|
author | Karagöz, Mehmet Ali Erihan, Ismet Bilger Doluoğlu, Ömer Gökhan Uğurlu, Çağlar Bağcıoğlu, Murat Uslu, Mehmet Sarıca, Kemal |
author_facet | Karagöz, Mehmet Ali Erihan, Ismet Bilger Doluoğlu, Ömer Gökhan Uğurlu, Çağlar Bağcıoğlu, Murat Uslu, Mehmet Sarıca, Kemal |
author_sort | Karagöz, Mehmet Ali |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: The aim of this article was to evaluate the safety and efficiency of flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) in the management of renal calculi larger than 20 mm. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 92 cases with renal calculi were managed with fURS and divided into two groups depending on the size of the stones; <20 mm and >20 mm (Group 1 and Group 2, respectively). The groups were compared with respect to treatment-related parameters including success, complication rates, hospitalization period and need for auxiliary procedures with an emphasis on the rate of infections. Success rates were also compared in each group according to stone location. RESULTS: Overall success rates after 3 months showed that stone-free rates in both groups were 84.1% (< 20 mm) and 58.33% (>20 mm) respectively (p = 0.008). The success rates of upper/mid pole (100% vs. 80%) and pelvis stones (83.3% vs. 75%) showed no statistically significant difference (p = 0.5, p = 0.51 respectively). Success rates for stones located in the lower pole were 75% vs. 14.28% respectively (p = 0.008). The rate of infectious complications was significantly higher in cases undergoing fURS for relatively larger stones (22.9%) as compared to smaller calculi (6.8%) (p = 0.032). No complications were recorded in Group 1, while 2 cases in Group 2 (4.1%) developed ureteral stricture. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the relatively low stone-free rates in lower pole stones, our current results indicate that fURS can be an effective and safe treatment alternative to PNL in larger renal stones (>20 mm) located in the pelvis and in the upper part of the calyceal system of the involved kidney. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7203769 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Polish Urological Association |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72037692020-05-11 Efficacy and safety of fURS in stones larger than 20 mm: is it still the threshold? Karagöz, Mehmet Ali Erihan, Ismet Bilger Doluoğlu, Ömer Gökhan Uğurlu, Çağlar Bağcıoğlu, Murat Uslu, Mehmet Sarıca, Kemal Cent European J Urol Original Paper INTRODUCTION: The aim of this article was to evaluate the safety and efficiency of flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) in the management of renal calculi larger than 20 mm. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 92 cases with renal calculi were managed with fURS and divided into two groups depending on the size of the stones; <20 mm and >20 mm (Group 1 and Group 2, respectively). The groups were compared with respect to treatment-related parameters including success, complication rates, hospitalization period and need for auxiliary procedures with an emphasis on the rate of infections. Success rates were also compared in each group according to stone location. RESULTS: Overall success rates after 3 months showed that stone-free rates in both groups were 84.1% (< 20 mm) and 58.33% (>20 mm) respectively (p = 0.008). The success rates of upper/mid pole (100% vs. 80%) and pelvis stones (83.3% vs. 75%) showed no statistically significant difference (p = 0.5, p = 0.51 respectively). Success rates for stones located in the lower pole were 75% vs. 14.28% respectively (p = 0.008). The rate of infectious complications was significantly higher in cases undergoing fURS for relatively larger stones (22.9%) as compared to smaller calculi (6.8%) (p = 0.032). No complications were recorded in Group 1, while 2 cases in Group 2 (4.1%) developed ureteral stricture. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the relatively low stone-free rates in lower pole stones, our current results indicate that fURS can be an effective and safe treatment alternative to PNL in larger renal stones (>20 mm) located in the pelvis and in the upper part of the calyceal system of the involved kidney. Polish Urological Association 2020-01-03 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7203769/ /pubmed/32395324 http://dx.doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2020.0056 Text en Copyright by Polish Urological Association http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License, allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license. |
spellingShingle | Original Paper Karagöz, Mehmet Ali Erihan, Ismet Bilger Doluoğlu, Ömer Gökhan Uğurlu, Çağlar Bağcıoğlu, Murat Uslu, Mehmet Sarıca, Kemal Efficacy and safety of fURS in stones larger than 20 mm: is it still the threshold? |
title | Efficacy and safety of fURS in stones larger than 20 mm: is it still the threshold? |
title_full | Efficacy and safety of fURS in stones larger than 20 mm: is it still the threshold? |
title_fullStr | Efficacy and safety of fURS in stones larger than 20 mm: is it still the threshold? |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy and safety of fURS in stones larger than 20 mm: is it still the threshold? |
title_short | Efficacy and safety of fURS in stones larger than 20 mm: is it still the threshold? |
title_sort | efficacy and safety of furs in stones larger than 20 mm: is it still the threshold? |
topic | Original Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7203769/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32395324 http://dx.doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2020.0056 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT karagozmehmetali efficacyandsafetyoffursinstoneslargerthan20mmisitstillthethreshold AT erihanismetbilger efficacyandsafetyoffursinstoneslargerthan20mmisitstillthethreshold AT doluogluomergokhan efficacyandsafetyoffursinstoneslargerthan20mmisitstillthethreshold AT ugurlucaglar efficacyandsafetyoffursinstoneslargerthan20mmisitstillthethreshold AT bagcıoglumurat efficacyandsafetyoffursinstoneslargerthan20mmisitstillthethreshold AT uslumehmet efficacyandsafetyoffursinstoneslargerthan20mmisitstillthethreshold AT sarıcakemal efficacyandsafetyoffursinstoneslargerthan20mmisitstillthethreshold |