What does this research mean for the field?

Ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UM-PCNL) achieves higher stone clearance and lower costs than retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for 1-3 cm renal stones, although RIRS provides faster recovery and shorter hospitalization. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.INCREMENTAL. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

What question did this study set out to answer?

To compare the clinical efficacy, safety profile, and procedural costs of ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal calculi measuring 1 to 3 cm.

September 8, 2026Arab Journal of UrologyOpen Access

Ultra mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal stones (1–3 cm): A prospective randomized comparative study

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

MSMohammed Metwally SadeqSuez University MAMahmoud H. AbdelsattarAin Shams University Hospital AYAbdelhamid A. YousefAin Shams University

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Randomized trial demonstrates higher stone clearance and lower procedural costs with ultra-mini PCNL versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stones, highlighting trade-offs in recovery.

Key Points

To compare the clinical efficacy, safety profile, and procedural costs of ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal calculi measuring 1 to 3 cm.
Prospective randomized comparative trial allocating 66 patients with symptomatic 1–3 cm renal calculi equally to ultra-mini PCNL (N = 33) or retrograde intrarenal surgery using flexible ureteroscopy (N = 33) (PACTR202602813362658).
Clinical success was significantly higher with ultra-mini PCNL than retrograde intrarenal surgery (93.9% vs 72.7%; absolute difference 21.2%, 95% CI 4.0–38.5%; p = 0.044).
Retrograde intrarenal surgery achieved significantly shorter operative time, reduced hospital stay, and faster return to normal activity (all p < 0.001), but incurred an approximately three-fold higher procedural cost (43,625.04 vs 15,944.38 LE).
Overall complication rates were comparable between ultra-mini PCNL and retrograde intrarenal surgery (30.3% vs 27.3%; p = 1.000), with all events classified as minor (Clavien–Dindo Grade I or II).

Cite This Study

Sadeq et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a9fd82058e84d0ff5b475c0 https://doi.org/10.1080/20905998.2026.2730098

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Implication

Randomized trial demonstrates higher stone clearance and lower procedural costs with ultra-mini PCNL versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stones, highlighting trade-offs in recovery.

Ultra mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal stones (1–3 cm): A prospective randomized comparative study

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Cite This Study

Ultra mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal stones (1–3 cm): A prospective randomized comparative study

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider