This retrospective study compares the safety and efficacy of FANS and mini-PCNL in patients with upper urinary tract stones and hydronephrosis, suggesting FANS as a safer option.
Management of upper urinary tract stones with moderate-to-severe hydronephrosis remains challenging due to altered renal anatomy and higher complication risks. Flexible negative-pressure ureteral sheath lithotripsy (FANS) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative to miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL). This study compared the efficacy and safety of FANS and mini-PCNL in this patient population. A total of 125 patients with upper urinary tract stones and moderate-to-severe hydronephrosis who underwent either FANS (n = 57) or mini-PCNL (n = 68) between June 2024 and June 2025 were retrospectively analyzed. Baseline demographics, stone characteristics, operative parameters, perioperative laboratory changes, hospital stay, immediate stone-free rate (SFR) and finial SFR, and postoperative complications were assessed. Baseline characteristics (age, BMI, stone burden, comorbidities, and hydronephrosis degree) were comparable between groups. The FANS group had a longer operative time (70 vs. 60 min, P = 0.006) but a shorter stay of hospital (2 vs. 3 days, P = 0.008) and smaller hemoglobin drop (8.0 vs. 11.0 g/L, P = 0.031). WBC changes, eGFR drop, immediate SFR (80.7% vs. 80.9%) and finial SFR (89.5% (51/57) vs. 88.2% (60/68)) were similar. The overall complication rate was lower with FANS (5.9% (4/57) vs. 25.0% (17/68), P = 0.011), and no severe complications occurred, whereas mini-PCNL included several Grade 3b events. Both FANS and mini-PCNL achieved comparable stone clearance in moderate-to-severe hydronephrosis. However, FANS offered reduced bleeding, faster recovery, and fewer complications, indicating its potential role as a safer and less invasive option for patients with complex upper urinary tract anatomy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hao et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: