Abstract Objective To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SPCNL) in the treatment of kidney stones combine with renal insufficiency. Patients and Methods: The data of 320 patients with renal calculi and an eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73m² who underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) at Zhongshan City People's Hospital from January 2018 to June 2023 were retrospectively analyzed; 164 patients were treated with MPCNL, and 156 were treated with SPCNL. The clinical efficacy of the MPCNL and SPCNL regimens was compared in terms of stone-free rate (SFR), renal function change, hemoglobin (HGB) drop and other complication rates (complications were classified by using the Clavien‒Dindo system). Results The SFR was 67.1% in the MPCNL group and 67.9% in the SPCNL group (P = 0.867). The overall eGFR of the two groups was significantly improved at 1 month after the operation (P < 0.001). Postoperative renal function was stable, improved and worse in 50.0% (n = 82) vs. 53.8% (n = 84), 39.0% (n = 64) vs. 42.4% (n = 66) and 11.0% (n = 18) vs. 3.8% (n = 6) of the MPCNL and SPCNL patients, respectively, compared with preoperative renal function (P = 0.053). In addition, the overall postoperative complication rates between the two groups was not significantly different (P = 0.103). Patients who underwent MPCNL had a lower transfusion rate (7.9% vs. 16.7%, P = 0.017) and shorter hospital stay (4.57 ± 3.14 vs. 7.16 ± 4.05 days, P < 0.001) than those in the SPCNL group. Conclusion MPCNL and SPCNL have positive effects on the treatment of renal calculi in patients with renal insufficiency; both have acceptable SFRs and complication rates, stable or improved renal function in most patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wei et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: