Adecuación De Servicios De Urología En Un Mod...

Testículo No Descendido Palpable. Tratamiento ...

Quality Of Life After Brachytherapy Or Robot-as...

Other Radiological Lesions Of The Lower Urinary...

Resultados Clínicos Y Urodinámicos Del Tratam...

0 votes
Comparative Study For The Efficacy And Safety Of Percutaneous Nefhrolithotomy (pcnl) And Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery (rirs) For The Treatment Of 2-3,5 Cm Kidney Stones.
Autor: J. L. Palmero, A. Duran-rivera, J. Miralles, J. C. Pastor Y A. Benedicto.
Editorial: Archivos Españoles de Urología
6 páginas
Pago único: €14.88
Requiere suscripción: Académico
Tipo de publicación: Articulo
Follow this publisher

Comparte esta publicación:


OBJECTIVES: Retrograde intrarenal

surgery (RIRS) has become an important alternative for

the treatment of kidney stones due to its increased safety

and efficiency. The purpose of this study is to compare

efficacy and safety features of RIRS against percutaneous

nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for the treatment of 2 - 3.5 cm

kidney stones.

METHODS: 142 cases (106 RIRS and 36 PCNL)

encompassing 2 - 3.5 cm kidney stones that have been

treated in our center between December 2009 and

December 2011 have been considered. Demographic

variables, stone characteristics, surgical stay and surgical

time have been evaluated. Additionally, the complication prerate

and success rate after one and two procedures

(retreatment) have also been assessed. Student`s T,

Mann-Whitney U y Chi2 - V Cramer (p=0.05) tests were

used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS: There are not statistically significant differences

in demographic or stone variables. The calculated

mean surgical time was lower for PCNL (85 min) than

for RIRS (112 min). Mean hospital stay was statistically

significantly shorter in RIRS (16 h vs. 98 h in RIRS,

p=0.001). PCNL exhibited a higher global complication

rate of 19.4% vs. 6.6% for RIRS (p=0.001). PCNL also

showed a higher successful rate (80.6% vs. 73.6%

for RIRS), although this difference was not statistically

significant (p=0.40). When comparing the success rate

after a second procedure, PCNL results in 94.3% vs.

93.5% for RIRS (p=0.88).

CONCLUSION: RIRS was found to be a safe and

efficient procedure with a short hospital stay. Overall,

RIRS can be considered as an alternative to PCNL for the

treatment of renal stones smaller than 3.5 cm.

Sobre el editor:

Revista Internacional de Urología indexada y peer-reviewed, fundada en 1944, dirigida a toda la comunidad científica. Aquí encontrarás las últimas novedades y hallazgos urológicos. Publicamos 10 números anuales.