Cohort study demonstrates high stone clearance and low complications with stone-guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy, suggesting a safe contrast-free option in select patients.
Background and rationale Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the preferred treatment option for large kidney stones due to high stone-free rates. Usually, a contrast study via retrograde ureteral catheter (U-Cath) visualises the pelvicalyceal system (PCS) under fluoroscopy. Although U-Cath is recommended in conventional PCNL (cPCNL), modifications such as direct puncture with antegrade contrast pyelography or stone-guided puncture followed by contrast injection have been employed in different circumstances. However, there are safety concerns in performing stone-guided PCNL (sg-PCNL) ‘without contrast pyelography or ultrasound’. We aim to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of sg-PCNL in selected cases without contrast pyelography or ultrasound. Materials and methods This study reports PCNL outcomes in 57 patients with urolithiasis who underwent stone-guided puncture (sg-PCNL) by a single surgeon at a tertiary hospital. The puncture landmark was the calyceal stone (aimed at its distal margin), targeted end-on using the Bull’s eye technique, with the initial puncture needle (IPN) aligned along the stone’s long axis; the puncture was performed solely under fluoroscopic guidance. In addition to demographic features, procedural variables such as puncture time, number of punctures, operation time, haemoglobin drop, stone-free rate, and complications were recorded and analysed. Results The operation duration in the sg-PCNL cohort averaged 54.45 min, with most surgeons rating visualisation as excellent (96.4%). There was a minimal, non-significant decrease in haemoglobin (0.9 ± 0.7 g/dL, p = 0.32) and creatinine (0.3 ± 0.7 mg/dL, p = 0.442). Stone-free status was achieved in 94.6% of patients, with 5.4% having residual stones. The complication rate was 3.6%, all grade I ( p = 0.627). Guidewire patterns were ‘Ureteric line’ (U) in 67.9% and ‘Upper pole-pelvic’ (UP) in 32.1%. Conclusion sg-PCNL is a safe, effective alternative to traditional techniques in select patients when performed by an experienced surgeon.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chakraborty et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: