Loading…

Comparison of Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy with Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Removal of Renal Stones in Adults

Renal stones are the third most common problem affecting about 10% of global population. The management of nephrolithiasis has undergone a complete transformation since the 1980s. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) has established itself an effective and safe technique that delivers high stone-free...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of renal and hepatic disorders 2021-09, Vol.5 (2), p.20-25
Main Authors: Alam Khan, Asif, Malkani, Inam, Jameel Khattak, Junaid, Mumtaz, Hassan, Mazhar, Mubashir, Naz, Falak, Riaz, Arsalan
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1844-df18f2326bbade6650a6c9b464ca94ed5ed42ab6afdd147d625e742c5ad7aa703
cites
container_end_page 25
container_issue 2
container_start_page 20
container_title Journal of renal and hepatic disorders
container_volume 5
creator Alam Khan, Asif
Malkani, Inam
Jameel Khattak, Junaid
Mumtaz, Hassan
Mazhar, Mubashir
Naz, Falak
Riaz, Arsalan
description Renal stones are the third most common problem affecting about 10% of global population. The management of nephrolithiasis has undergone a complete transformation since the 1980s. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) has established itself an effective and safe technique that delivers high stone-free rate as well as overall shorter treatment time. We aim to compare the outcome of mini-PCNL with standard-PCNL in patients presenting with renal stones. In all, 90 patients fulfilled the selection criteria and randomized into two groups. Group A underwent mini-PCNL whereas Group B underwent standard-PCNL. Pre-operative hemoglobin level was recorded. Duration of procedure as well as drop in hemoglobin level was also recorded. A kidney, ureter, and bladder (KUB) X-ray was performed to confirm the presence of of stone and stone-free status. The mean age of patients in mini-PCNL group was 43.11 years and in standard-PCNL group, it was 36.91 years. The mean stone size in patients of mini-PCNL group was 29.53 mm and 31.58 mm in standard-PCNL group. The mean duration of renal stone in mini-PCNL group was 1.91 years and that in standard-PCNL group 1.80 years. The mean operative time in mini-PCNL group was 59.56 min and 61.22 min in standard-PCNL group. The mean fall in hemoglobin in mini-PCNL group was 0.38 g/dL and that in standard-PCNL group 0.51 g/dL. In mini-PCNL group, stone clearance was observed in 42 (93.3%) patients, while in standard-PCNL group, it was observed in 45 (100%) patients. This difference was insignificant (P > 0.05). Mini-PCNL and standard-PCNL have no significant differences in terms of outcome, operative time, and stone clearance, although fall in hemoglobin level was less in mini-PCNL group, which showed less blood loss in this group, thereby making it a more appropriate method for renal stone removal.  
doi_str_mv 10.15586/jrenhep.v5i2.118
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_040f852abc484a4196453f007e7c3751</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_040f852abc484a4196453f007e7c3751</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>2720417264</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1844-df18f2326bbade6650a6c9b464ca94ed5ed42ab6afdd147d625e742c5ad7aa703</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1r3DAQhk1poCHND-hN0LO3kjySvMew5GMhaUuSnsWsNOpq8VqOZKfk1p8eJxtCTz3p1fDyDMNTVV8EXwilWv1tl6nf0rB4VFEuhGg_VMdSclM3BuDjP_lTdVrKjnMueWta1RxXf1dpP2COJfUsBXY3Yu8xe_aTspvmD6WpsO80bHPq4rhNY9o_sT9zYjexj_V_ayFldkv79IjdC_uW-jncjamnwmLPzvzUjeVzdRSwK3T69p5Uvy7O71dX9fWPy_Xq7Lp2ogWofRBtkI3Umw160lpx1G65AQ0Ol0BekQeJG43BewHGa6nIgHQKvUE0vDmp1geuT7izQ457zE82YbSvg5R_W8xjdB1ZDjy0aqY5aAFBLDWoJnBuyLjGKDGzvh5YQ04PE5XR7tKU5-uKlUZyEEZqmFvi0HI5lZIpvG8V3L56s2_e7Is3O3trngH3d5BP</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2720417264</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy with Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Removal of Renal Stones in Adults</title><source>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</source><source>EZB Electronic Journals Library</source><creator>Alam Khan, Asif ; Malkani, Inam ; Jameel Khattak, Junaid ; Mumtaz, Hassan ; Mazhar, Mubashir ; Naz, Falak ; Riaz, Arsalan</creator><creatorcontrib>Alam Khan, Asif ; Malkani, Inam ; Jameel Khattak, Junaid ; Mumtaz, Hassan ; Mazhar, Mubashir ; Naz, Falak ; Riaz, Arsalan</creatorcontrib><description>Renal stones are the third most common problem affecting about 10% of global population. The management of nephrolithiasis has undergone a complete transformation since the 1980s. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) has established itself an effective and safe technique that delivers high stone-free rate as well as overall shorter treatment time. We aim to compare the outcome of mini-PCNL with standard-PCNL in patients presenting with renal stones. In all, 90 patients fulfilled the selection criteria and randomized into two groups. Group A underwent mini-PCNL whereas Group B underwent standard-PCNL. Pre-operative hemoglobin level was recorded. Duration of procedure as well as drop in hemoglobin level was also recorded. A kidney, ureter, and bladder (KUB) X-ray was performed to confirm the presence of of stone and stone-free status. The mean age of patients in mini-PCNL group was 43.11 years and in standard-PCNL group, it was 36.91 years. The mean stone size in patients of mini-PCNL group was 29.53 mm and 31.58 mm in standard-PCNL group. The mean duration of renal stone in mini-PCNL group was 1.91 years and that in standard-PCNL group 1.80 years. The mean operative time in mini-PCNL group was 59.56 min and 61.22 min in standard-PCNL group. The mean fall in hemoglobin in mini-PCNL group was 0.38 g/dL and that in standard-PCNL group 0.51 g/dL. In mini-PCNL group, stone clearance was observed in 42 (93.3%) patients, while in standard-PCNL group, it was observed in 45 (100%) patients. This difference was insignificant (P &gt; 0.05). Mini-PCNL and standard-PCNL have no significant differences in terms of outcome, operative time, and stone clearance, although fall in hemoglobin level was less in mini-PCNL group, which showed less blood loss in this group, thereby making it a more appropriate method for renal stone removal.  </description><identifier>ISSN: 2207-3744</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2207-3744</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.15586/jrenhep.v5i2.118</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Brisbane: Codon Publications</publisher><subject>Age ; Chi-square test ; Hemoglobin ; Independent sample ; Kidney stones ; Lithotripsy ; Males ; mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy ; nephrolithiasis ; operative time ; Renal stone ; standard procedure ; stone removal ; Urological surgery</subject><ispartof>Journal of renal and hepatic disorders, 2021-09, Vol.5 (2), p.20-25</ispartof><rights>2021. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1844-df18f2326bbade6650a6c9b464ca94ed5ed42ab6afdd147d625e742c5ad7aa703</citedby><orcidid>0000-0003-2881-2556</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2720417264/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2720417264?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,25751,27922,27923,37010,44588,74896</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Alam Khan, Asif</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Malkani, Inam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jameel Khattak, Junaid</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mumtaz, Hassan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mazhar, Mubashir</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Naz, Falak</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Riaz, Arsalan</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy with Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Removal of Renal Stones in Adults</title><title>Journal of renal and hepatic disorders</title><description>Renal stones are the third most common problem affecting about 10% of global population. The management of nephrolithiasis has undergone a complete transformation since the 1980s. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) has established itself an effective and safe technique that delivers high stone-free rate as well as overall shorter treatment time. We aim to compare the outcome of mini-PCNL with standard-PCNL in patients presenting with renal stones. In all, 90 patients fulfilled the selection criteria and randomized into two groups. Group A underwent mini-PCNL whereas Group B underwent standard-PCNL. Pre-operative hemoglobin level was recorded. Duration of procedure as well as drop in hemoglobin level was also recorded. A kidney, ureter, and bladder (KUB) X-ray was performed to confirm the presence of of stone and stone-free status. The mean age of patients in mini-PCNL group was 43.11 years and in standard-PCNL group, it was 36.91 years. The mean stone size in patients of mini-PCNL group was 29.53 mm and 31.58 mm in standard-PCNL group. The mean duration of renal stone in mini-PCNL group was 1.91 years and that in standard-PCNL group 1.80 years. The mean operative time in mini-PCNL group was 59.56 min and 61.22 min in standard-PCNL group. The mean fall in hemoglobin in mini-PCNL group was 0.38 g/dL and that in standard-PCNL group 0.51 g/dL. In mini-PCNL group, stone clearance was observed in 42 (93.3%) patients, while in standard-PCNL group, it was observed in 45 (100%) patients. This difference was insignificant (P &gt; 0.05). Mini-PCNL and standard-PCNL have no significant differences in terms of outcome, operative time, and stone clearance, although fall in hemoglobin level was less in mini-PCNL group, which showed less blood loss in this group, thereby making it a more appropriate method for renal stone removal.  </description><subject>Age</subject><subject>Chi-square test</subject><subject>Hemoglobin</subject><subject>Independent sample</subject><subject>Kidney stones</subject><subject>Lithotripsy</subject><subject>Males</subject><subject>mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy</subject><subject>nephrolithiasis</subject><subject>operative time</subject><subject>Renal stone</subject><subject>standard procedure</subject><subject>stone removal</subject><subject>Urological surgery</subject><issn>2207-3744</issn><issn>2207-3744</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU1r3DAQhk1poCHND-hN0LO3kjySvMew5GMhaUuSnsWsNOpq8VqOZKfk1p8eJxtCTz3p1fDyDMNTVV8EXwilWv1tl6nf0rB4VFEuhGg_VMdSclM3BuDjP_lTdVrKjnMueWta1RxXf1dpP2COJfUsBXY3Yu8xe_aTspvmD6WpsO80bHPq4rhNY9o_sT9zYjexj_V_ayFldkv79IjdC_uW-jncjamnwmLPzvzUjeVzdRSwK3T69p5Uvy7O71dX9fWPy_Xq7Lp2ogWofRBtkI3Umw160lpx1G65AQ0Ol0BekQeJG43BewHGa6nIgHQKvUE0vDmp1geuT7izQ457zE82YbSvg5R_W8xjdB1ZDjy0aqY5aAFBLDWoJnBuyLjGKDGzvh5YQ04PE5XR7tKU5-uKlUZyEEZqmFvi0HI5lZIpvG8V3L56s2_e7Is3O3trngH3d5BP</recordid><startdate>20210908</startdate><enddate>20210908</enddate><creator>Alam Khan, Asif</creator><creator>Malkani, Inam</creator><creator>Jameel Khattak, Junaid</creator><creator>Mumtaz, Hassan</creator><creator>Mazhar, Mubashir</creator><creator>Naz, Falak</creator><creator>Riaz, Arsalan</creator><general>Codon Publications</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2881-2556</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210908</creationdate><title>Comparison of Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy with Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Removal of Renal Stones in Adults</title><author>Alam Khan, Asif ; Malkani, Inam ; Jameel Khattak, Junaid ; Mumtaz, Hassan ; Mazhar, Mubashir ; Naz, Falak ; Riaz, Arsalan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1844-df18f2326bbade6650a6c9b464ca94ed5ed42ab6afdd147d625e742c5ad7aa703</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Age</topic><topic>Chi-square test</topic><topic>Hemoglobin</topic><topic>Independent sample</topic><topic>Kidney stones</topic><topic>Lithotripsy</topic><topic>Males</topic><topic>mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy</topic><topic>nephrolithiasis</topic><topic>operative time</topic><topic>Renal stone</topic><topic>standard procedure</topic><topic>stone removal</topic><topic>Urological surgery</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Alam Khan, Asif</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Malkani, Inam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jameel Khattak, Junaid</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mumtaz, Hassan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mazhar, Mubashir</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Naz, Falak</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Riaz, Arsalan</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Journal of renal and hepatic disorders</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Alam Khan, Asif</au><au>Malkani, Inam</au><au>Jameel Khattak, Junaid</au><au>Mumtaz, Hassan</au><au>Mazhar, Mubashir</au><au>Naz, Falak</au><au>Riaz, Arsalan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy with Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Removal of Renal Stones in Adults</atitle><jtitle>Journal of renal and hepatic disorders</jtitle><date>2021-09-08</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>5</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>20</spage><epage>25</epage><pages>20-25</pages><issn>2207-3744</issn><eissn>2207-3744</eissn><abstract>Renal stones are the third most common problem affecting about 10% of global population. The management of nephrolithiasis has undergone a complete transformation since the 1980s. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) has established itself an effective and safe technique that delivers high stone-free rate as well as overall shorter treatment time. We aim to compare the outcome of mini-PCNL with standard-PCNL in patients presenting with renal stones. In all, 90 patients fulfilled the selection criteria and randomized into two groups. Group A underwent mini-PCNL whereas Group B underwent standard-PCNL. Pre-operative hemoglobin level was recorded. Duration of procedure as well as drop in hemoglobin level was also recorded. A kidney, ureter, and bladder (KUB) X-ray was performed to confirm the presence of of stone and stone-free status. The mean age of patients in mini-PCNL group was 43.11 years and in standard-PCNL group, it was 36.91 years. The mean stone size in patients of mini-PCNL group was 29.53 mm and 31.58 mm in standard-PCNL group. The mean duration of renal stone in mini-PCNL group was 1.91 years and that in standard-PCNL group 1.80 years. The mean operative time in mini-PCNL group was 59.56 min and 61.22 min in standard-PCNL group. The mean fall in hemoglobin in mini-PCNL group was 0.38 g/dL and that in standard-PCNL group 0.51 g/dL. In mini-PCNL group, stone clearance was observed in 42 (93.3%) patients, while in standard-PCNL group, it was observed in 45 (100%) patients. This difference was insignificant (P &gt; 0.05). Mini-PCNL and standard-PCNL have no significant differences in terms of outcome, operative time, and stone clearance, although fall in hemoglobin level was less in mini-PCNL group, which showed less blood loss in this group, thereby making it a more appropriate method for renal stone removal.  </abstract><cop>Brisbane</cop><pub>Codon Publications</pub><doi>10.15586/jrenhep.v5i2.118</doi><tpages>6</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2881-2556</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2207-3744
ispartof Journal of renal and hepatic disorders, 2021-09, Vol.5 (2), p.20-25
issn 2207-3744
2207-3744
language eng
recordid cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_040f852abc484a4196453f007e7c3751
source Publicly Available Content (ProQuest); EZB Electronic Journals Library
subjects Age
Chi-square test
Hemoglobin
Independent sample
Kidney stones
Lithotripsy
Males
mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy
nephrolithiasis
operative time
Renal stone
standard procedure
stone removal
Urological surgery
title Comparison of Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy with Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Removal of Renal Stones in Adults
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T03%3A37%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20Standard%20Percutaneous%20Nephrolithotomy%20with%20Mini-Percutaneous%20Nephrolithotomy%20for%20Removal%20of%20Renal%20Stones%20in%20Adults&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20renal%20and%20hepatic%20disorders&rft.au=Alam%20Khan,%20Asif&rft.date=2021-09-08&rft.volume=5&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=20&rft.epage=25&rft.pages=20-25&rft.issn=2207-3744&rft.eissn=2207-3744&rft_id=info:doi/10.15586/jrenhep.v5i2.118&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E2720417264%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1844-df18f2326bbade6650a6c9b464ca94ed5ed42ab6afdd147d625e742c5ad7aa703%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2720417264&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true