Pulse nav.journalClub Tendencias Explorar Preguntas Investigadores

Download the App

Join discussions, follow papers, and never miss your next session.

© Synapse Social LLC, 2026Política de privacidad

Inicio Explorar nav.journalClub Tendencias

⌘+K

March 30, 2026Open Access

RIRS vs PCNL in treating lower-pole renal stones: a comparative clinical outcome study

Puntos clave

The aim is to compare the clinical outcomes of RIRS and PCNL in treating lower-pole renal stones.
Reviewed clinical outcomes of RIRS and PCNL treatments
Assessed perioperative profiles including morbidity and recovery times
Evaluated stone clearance rates for both methods
PCNL shows better stone clearance for stones 1-2 cm in size
RIRS demonstrates lower morbidity and faster recovery times
Treatment selection is case-dependent, balancing stone clearance and patient risk

Resumen

PCNL is better used in the treatment of inferior pole renal stones not exceeding 1-2 cm in size and RIRS is better in terms of perioperative profile (lowest morbidity, faster recovery). The selection of treatment must be made on a case-by-case basis with a trade-off between the greatest clearance of the stone and the risk inherent in the treatment and characteristics of the patient.

Leer artículo completoexternamente

Me gusta

Guardar

Compartir

Ver artículo completo

Me gusta

Guardar

Compartir

Ver artículo completo

RIRS vs PCNL in treating lower-pole renal stones: a comparative clinical outcome study | Synapse

Cite This Study

Samer Fathi Al-Rawashdah (Fri,) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69ca12d4883daed6ee09515e https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/20565623.2026.2646277