Introduction. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) is the method of choice for the treatment of patients with kidney stones larger than 2 cm. Mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PNL) became widespread due to reduction of injury associated with surgical approach. Creation of puncture access to the pelvicalyceal system without ureteral catheterization is also recently described. The main benefits of such technique are reduction of total operative time and the radiation exposure to the patient and medical personnel. The results of using mini-PNL without prior ureteral catheterization remain insufficiently studied, which predetermined the goal of our study.
Purpose. Compare the efficacy and duration of mini-PCNL with and without ureteral catheterization.
Materials and methods. We analyzed the treatment outcomes of 111 patients with a single kidney stone. Group I included 60 patients who underwent mini-PCNL according to the standard technique. Group II included 51 patients who underwent mini-PCNL without prior catheterization of the ureter. The average stone size was 19.2±0.92 mm and 18.6± 0.93 mm in groups I and II, respectively. The puncture of the pyelocaliceal system of the kidney was performed under X-ray control and US guidance using the free-hand technique.
Results. In group I, complete elimination of the stone was achieved in 55 (92%) patients and the mean duration of the operation was 108,3±34,85 min (range: 60 to 210). In group II, complete elimination of the stone was achieved in 50 (90%) patients and the mean duration of the operation was 69,7±22 min (range: 25 to 120 min). In all cases, the severity of complications did not exceed grade II according to Clavien classification, and their rate was 6,7% and 5,9% in group I and group II, respectively.
Conclusions. According to the results of the study, the compared groups did not differ in their post-operative complication and stone-free rates. Avoidance of routine ureteral catheterization significantly reduces the operation time and hence the anesthetic risk and radiation load.
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.