Clinical study of UMP and RIRS in 1.0–2.0 cm diameter renal/upper ureteral calculi

• Published in: World journal of urology 2024-06, Vol.42 (1), p.376
• Main Authors: Lin, Haili, Lin, Huiying, Liu, Chenyu, Lin, Tianqi, He, Yongxin, Shen, Zaixiong, Ruan, Minyi
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Bleeding; Calcification (ectopic); Creatinine; Diabetes; Female; Hospitals; Humans; Hydronephrosis; Hypertension; Infections; Kidney Calculi - surgery; Kidney stones; Kidneys; Male; Medical imaging; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Middle Aged; Nephrolithotomy, Percutaneous - methods; Nephrology; Oncology; Original Article; Pelvis; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology; Postoperative infection; Retrospective Studies; Surgery; Treatment Outcome; Ultrasonic imaging; Ureteral Calculi - surgery; Urogenital system; Urological surgery; Urology
• ISSN: 0724-4983; 1433-8726; 1433-8726
• DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-05076-0

Background The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of Ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMP) and Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for renal/upper ureteral calculi in 1.0–2.0 cm diameter. Methods From October 2017 to October 2022, the surgical treatment of patients with renal/upper ureteral calculi in 1.0–2.0 cm diameter who were admitted to our hospital was retrospectively analyzed. They were divided into two groups, the UMP group (sixty-two cases) and the RIRS group (one hundred and nine cases), according to the different surgical methods. Baseline data includes general information, stone size, location, CT value, hydronephrosis, creatinine level, etc. Results Intraoperative blood loss was 33.6 ± 8.5 ml in the UMP group was significantly more than 4.3 ± 0.7 ml in the RIRS group ( P