Ultra-Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotripsy and Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery in Treatment of Less than 2 cm Kidney Stones: Comparative Efficacy and Safety

Background. Renal stones of ≤ 2cm size occur most commonly, with several treatment options currently available that include remote shockwave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). The choice of treatment for ≤ 2 cm kidney stones remains a relevant and hotly debated issue.

Aim. A study of the efficacy, safety, advantages and disadvantages of ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (ultra-mini PCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in treatment of ≤ 2 cm kidney stones.

Materials and methods. Treatment outcomes in urology patients of the Botkin Hospital were analysed retrospectively for years 2017–2022. The patients were divided between cohorts: cohort 1 consisted of patients who underwent ultra-mini PCNL; cohort 2 included 41 patients with RIRS.

Results and discussion. The incidence of complete stone absence on the day after surgery was significantly higher in cohort 1 (39; 92.8 %) vs. 2 (33; 80.4 %). Mean operation time was significantly less in cohort 1 (55 [30–80] min) vs. 2 (78 [30–125] min). Mean hospital stay did not differ significantly between the cohorts: 3 (1–5) vs. 2.8 (2–4) days in cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. Haematuria was statistically more severe in cohort 1 (7 cases; 16.6 %) vs. 2 (4 cases; 9.7 %); mean postoperative haemoglobin decrease was also significantly higher in cohort 1 (11.6) vs. 2 (6.4 g/L).

Conclusion. Both ultra-mini PCNL and RIRS are effective, safe and complementary procedures in treatment for ≤2 cm renal stones. Ultra-mini PCNL is more effective over RIRS in terms of single-intervention complete stone removal and shorter operation time, whereas the overall complications rate did not significantly differ between cohorts.

1. Kaprin A.D., Apolikhin O.I., Sivkov A.V., Solntseva T.V., Komarova V.A The analysis of uronephrologic morbidity and mortality in Russian Federation during the period of 2002–2014 according to the official statistics. Experimental and Clinical Urology. 2016;3:4–13 (In Russ.).

2. Zhang H., Hong T., Li G., Jiang N., Hu C., Cui X., et al. Comparison of the efficacy of ultra-mini PCNL, flexible ureteroscopy, and shock wave lithotripsy on the treatment of 1–2 cm lower pole renal calculi. Urol Int. 2019;102(2):153–9. DOI: 10.1159/000493508

3. Jung H.D., Chung D.Y., Kim D.K., Lee M.H., Lee S.W., Paick S., et al. Comparison of ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stones: a systematic review and metaanalysis from the KSER update series. J Clin Med. 2022;11(6):1529. DOI: 10.3390/jcm11061529

4. Kılıç Ö., Akand M., Van Cleynenbreugel B. Retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stones — Part 2. Turk J Urol. 2017;43(3):252–60. DOI: 10.5152/tud.2017.22697

5. Alken P. Is super-mini-PCNL (SMP) a new way in the future? BJU Int. 2020;125(4):483–4. DOI: 10.1111/bju.14969

6. Shah K., Agrawal M.S., Mishra D.K. Superperc: A new technique in minimally-invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Indian J Urol. 2017;33(1):48–52. DOI: 10.4103/0970-1591.194784

7. Guddeti R.S., Hegde P., Chawla A., de la Rosette J.J.M.C.H., Laguna Pes M.P., Kapadia A. Super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) vs standard PCNL for the management of renal calculi of < 2 cm: a randomised controlled study. BJU Int. 2020;126(2):273–9. DOI: 10.1111/bju.15144

8. Joshi R. Early experience of retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stone: a descriptive cross-sectional study. JNMA J Nepal Med Assoc. 2020;58(227):465–9. DOI: 10.31729/jnma.4819

9. Rodríguez-Monsalve Herrero M., Doizi S., Keller E.X., De Coninck V., Traxer O. Retrograde intrarenal surgery: An expanding role in treatment of urolithiasis. Asian J Urol. 2018;5(4):264–73. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajur.2018.06.005

10. Alenezi H., Denstedt J.D. Flexible ureteroscopy: Technological advancements, current indications and outcomes in the treatment of urolithiasis. Asian J Urol. 2015;2(3):133–41. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajur.2015.06.002

11. Zhang W., Zhou T., Wu T., Gao X., Peng Y., Xu C., et al. Retrograde intrarenal surgery versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for treatment of lower pole renal stones: a meta-analysis and systematic review. J Endourol. 2015;29(7):745–59. DOI: 10.1089/end.2014.0799

12. Demirbas A., Resorlu B., Sunay M.M., Karakan T., Karagöz M.A., Doluoglu O.G. Which should be preferred for moderate-size kidney stones? Ultramini percutaneous nephrolithotomy or retrograde intrarenal surgery? J Endourol. 2016;30(12):1285–9. DOI: 10.1089/end.2016.0370

13. Sorokin I., Cardona-Grau D.K., Rehfuss A., Birney A., Stavrakis C., Leinwand G., et al. Stone volume is best predictor of operative time required in retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal calculi: implications for surgical planning and quality improvement. Urolithiasis. 2016;44(6):545–50. DOI: 10.1007/s00240-016-0875-8

14. Zeng G., Zhang T., Agrawal M., He X., Zhang W., Xiao K., et al. Super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SMP) vs retrograde intrarenal surgery for the treatment of 1-2 cm lower-pole renal calculi: an international multicentre randomised controlled trial. BJU Int. 2018;122(6):1034–40. DOI: 10.1111/bju.14427

15. Kandemir A., Guven S., Balasar M., Sonmez M.G., Taskapu H., Gurbuz R. A prospective randomized comparison of micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy (Microperc) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the management of lower pole kidney stones. World J Urol. 2017;35(11):1771–6. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-017-2058-9

16. Bozkurt O.F., Resorlu B., Yildiz Y., Can C.E., Unsal A. Retrograde intrarenal surgery versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the management of lower-pole renal stones with a diameter of 15 to 20 mm. J Endourol. 2011;25(7):1131–5. DOI: 10.1089/end.2010.0737

17. Grasso M., Ficazzola M. Retrograde ureteropyeloscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi. J Urol. 1999;162(6):1904–8. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(05)68065-2

18. Sabnis R.B., Ganesamoni R., Doshi A., Ganpule A.P., Jagtap J., Desai M.R. Micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy (microperc) vs retrograde intrarenal surgery for the management of small renal calculi: a randomized controlled trial. BJU Int. 2013;112(3):355–61. DOI: 10.1111/bju.12164

19. Kirac M., Bozkurt Ö.F., Tunc L., Guneri C., Unsal A., Biri H. Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of lower-pole renal stones with a diameter of smaller than 15 mm. Urolithiasis. 2013;41(3):241–6. DOI: 10.1007/s00240-013-0552-0

20. Xu Y., Min Z., Wan S.P., Nie H., Duan G. Complications of retrograde intrarenal surgery classified by the modified Clavien grading system. Urolithiasis. 2018;46(2):197–202. DOI: 10.1007/s00240-017-0961-6

21. Tokas T., Skolarikos A., Herrmann T.R.W., Nagele U. Training and research in urological surgery and technology (T.R.U.S.T.)-Group. Pressure matters 2: intrarenal pressure ranges during upper-tract endourological procedures. World J Urol. 2019;37(1):133–42. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-018-2379-3

22. Akman T., Binbay M., Yuruk E., Sari E., Seirek M., Kaba M. Tubeless procedure is the most important factor in reducing hospital stay after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: results from univariate and multivariate models. Urology.2011;77(2):299–304. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2010.06.060