This preprint is under consideration at BMC Urology. A preprint is a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
A comparison among PCNL, Miniperc and Ultraminiperc for lower calyceal stones between 1 and 2 cm : A prospective, comparative, multicenter and randomised study.
Tahsin B Aydogan
Universita degli Studi di Modena e Reggio Emilia
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2000-7790
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background Conventional Percutaneous Lithotripsy (PCNL) has been an effective, successful and easy approach for especially >1 cm sized calyceal stones however risks of complications and nephron loss are inevitable. Our aim is to compare the efficacy and safety of PCNL, MiniPerc(MP) and UltraMiniPerc(UMP) for lower calyceal stones between 1 and 2 cm with a multicenter prospective randomized study.
Methods Between January 2015 and June 2018, 132 consecutive patients with single lower calyceal stone were enrolled. Patients were randomized in three groups; A: PCNL; B: MP; C: UMP. 44 patients for the Group A, 47 for Group B and 41 for Group C. Exclusion criterias were the presence of coagulation impairments, age of <18 or >75, presence of infection or serious comorbidities. Patients were controlled with computerized tomography scan after 3 months. A negative CT or an asymptomatic patient with stone fragments < 3 mm size were the criteria to assess the stone-free status. Patient characteristics, stone free rates (SFR)s, complications and re-treatment rates were analyzed.
Results The mean stone size were 16.38, 17.82 and 15.23mm respectively in Group A, B and C(p=0.34). The overall SFR was significantly higher in Group A (86.3%) and B (82.9%) as compared to Group C (78%)(p<0.05). The re-treatment rate was significantly higher in Group C (12.1%) and complication rates was higher in Group A (13.6%) as compared to others(p<0.05). The hospitalization was significantly shorter in Group C compared to Group A(p=0.04).
Conclusions PCNL and MP showed higher efficacy than UMP to obtain a better SFR. Auxiliary and re-treatment rates were higher in UMP. On the other hand for such this kind of stones PCNL had more complications. Overall evaluation favors MP as a better indication in stones 1-2 cm size.
Keywords
PCNL; percutaneous; miniperc; ultraminiperc; lower calyces stones ; stone-free rate
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Under Review
Version 3
Posted 18 May, 2020
No community comments so far
Review #2 received
Received 24 May, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 16 May, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 11 May, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 11 May, 2020
Editor assigned
On 05 May, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 05 May, 2020
Editor invited
On 04 May, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 09 Mar, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 27 Apr, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 24 Apr, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 24 Apr, 2020
Review #3 received
Received 17 Apr, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 12 Apr, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 09 Apr, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 09 Apr, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 09 Apr, 2020
Editor assigned
On 06 Apr, 2020
Editor invited
On 05 Apr, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 31 Mar, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 24 Mar, 2020
Review #3 received
Received 23 Mar, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 20 Mar, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 19 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #4 agreed
On 17 Mar, 2020
Review #4 received
Received 17 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 13 Mar, 2020
Editor assigned
On 10 Mar, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 10 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 10 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 10 Mar, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 09 Mar, 2020
Editor invited
On 09 Mar, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Urology & Nephrology
Learn more about our company.
This preprint is under consideration at BMC Urology. A preprint is a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
A comparison among PCNL, Miniperc and Ultraminiperc for lower calyceal stones between 1 and 2 cm : A prospective, comparative, multicenter and randomised study.
Tahsin B Aydogan
Universita degli Studi di Modena e Reggio Emilia
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2000-7790
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Under Review
Version 3
Posted 18 May, 2020
No community comments so far
Review #2 received
Received 24 May, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 16 May, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 11 May, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 11 May, 2020
Editor assigned
On 05 May, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 05 May, 2020
Editor invited
On 04 May, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 09 Mar, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 27 Apr, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 24 Apr, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 24 Apr, 2020
Review #3 received
Received 17 Apr, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 12 Apr, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 09 Apr, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 09 Apr, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 09 Apr, 2020
Editor assigned
On 06 Apr, 2020
Editor invited
On 05 Apr, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 31 Mar, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 24 Mar, 2020
Review #3 received
Received 23 Mar, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 20 Mar, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 19 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #4 agreed
On 17 Mar, 2020
Review #4 received
Received 17 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 13 Mar, 2020
Editor assigned
On 10 Mar, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 10 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 10 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 10 Mar, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 09 Mar, 2020
Editor invited
On 09 Mar, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Urology & Nephrology
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background Conventional Percutaneous Lithotripsy (PCNL) has been an effective, successful and easy approach for especially >1 cm sized calyceal stones however risks of complications and nephron loss are inevitable. Our aim is to compare the efficacy and safety of PCNL, MiniPerc(MP) and UltraMiniPerc(UMP) for lower calyceal stones between 1 and 2 cm with a multicenter prospective randomized study.
Methods Between January 2015 and June 2018, 132 consecutive patients with single lower calyceal stone were enrolled. Patients were randomized in three groups; A: PCNL; B: MP; C: UMP. 44 patients for the Group A, 47 for Group B and 41 for Group C. Exclusion criterias were the presence of coagulation impairments, age of <18 or >75, presence of infection or serious comorbidities. Patients were controlled with computerized tomography scan after 3 months. A negative CT or an asymptomatic patient with stone fragments < 3 mm size were the criteria to assess the stone-free status. Patient characteristics, stone free rates (SFR)s, complications and re-treatment rates were analyzed.
Results The mean stone size were 16.38, 17.82 and 15.23mm respectively in Group A, B and C(p=0.34). The overall SFR was significantly higher in Group A (86.3%) and B (82.9%) as compared to Group C (78%)(p<0.05). The re-treatment rate was significantly higher in Group C (12.1%) and complication rates was higher in Group A (13.6%) as compared to others(p<0.05). The hospitalization was significantly shorter in Group C compared to Group A(p=0.04).
Conclusions PCNL and MP showed higher efficacy than UMP to obtain a better SFR. Auxiliary and re-treatment rates were higher in UMP. On the other hand for such this kind of stones PCNL had more complications. Overall evaluation favors MP as a better indication in stones 1-2 cm size.