Mp04-17 Prone Versus Supine Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Medium Sized (1-3cm) Renal Stones: A Prospective Randomized Trial

You have accessJournal of UrologyStone Disease: Surgical Therapy (including ESWL) I (MP04)1 May 2024MP04-17 PRONE VERSUS SUPINE MINI-PERCUTANEOUS NEPHROLITHOTOMY FOR MEDIUM SIZED (1-3CM) RENAL STONES: A PROSPECTIVE RANDOMIZED TRIAL Abdelrahman Bedair, Ahmed Zoeir, Ahmed El-saka, Ahmed Abou ramadan, Hassan Eltatawy, and Abdelhamid Elbahnasy Abdelrahman BedairAbdelrahman Bedair , Ahmed ZoeirAhmed Zoeir , Ahmed El-sakaAhmed El-saka , Ahmed Abou ramadanAhmed Abou ramadan , Hassan EltatawyHassan Eltatawy , and Abdelhamid ElbahnasyAbdelhamid Elbahnasy View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001008708.00982.a9.17AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Mini-PCNL (≤ 22Fr) was introduced in the 1990s to decrease morbidity associated with standard (24–30F) percutaneous nephrolithotomy. The prone position could be associated with several anesthetic and surgical drawbacks. The supine position PCNL was introduced in 1987 by Valdivia to overcome these disadvantages. In this setting, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy for medium sized renal stones (1-3 cm) in supine position versus prone position. METHODS: After the approval of local ethical committee, 80 patients with medium sized renal stones (1-3 cm) were randomized into 2 groups: Group A (40) patients underwent (supine mini-PCNL in Galdakao modified supine valdivia position), Group B (40) patients underwent (prone mini-PCNL). We used the minimally invasive PCNL (MIP set, KARL STORZ system,) with Holmium laser lithotripsy. Demographic data, Operative and postoperative data were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Both groups were comparable in terms of patients' demographic and stone criteria. The mean operative time was significantly shorter in group A (112.8±20.82) compared to Group B (136.1±26.51) p value . The final SFR was 89.5% and 83.8% in groups A and B respectively (p value=0.469). Both groups were comparable as regards the auxiliary procedures, hospitalization period, and postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Both supine and prone mini-PCNL were shown to be effective and safe for medium sized renal stones with comparable SFR and overall complications. The shorter operative time was in favor of supine mini-PCNL. Further studies are needed to confirm our results. Source of Funding: No conflict of interest © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e41 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Abdelrahman Bedair More articles by this author Ahmed Zoeir More articles by this author Ahmed El-saka More articles by this author Ahmed Abou ramadan More articles by this author Hassan Eltatawy More articles by this author Abdelhamid Elbahnasy More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...