| Autor: |
Mishra DK; Department of Urology, Pushpanjali Hospital and Research Center Pvt Ltd, Agra, India., Agrawal MS; Department of Urology, Rainbow Hospital, Agra, India.; Urology Division, Department of Surgery, S.N. Medical College, Agra, India., Shah M; Department of Urology, Max Superspecialty Hospital, New Delhi, India., Naganathan K; Department of Urology, Frontline Hospital and Research Center, Trichy, India., Hameed Z; Department of Urology, Father Muller Medical College, Mangalore, India., Gauhar V; Department of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore. |
| Abstrakt: |
Aim: To conduct a comparative, nonrandomized study to assess the feasibility of mini-Endoscopic Combined Intrarenal Surgery (ECIRS) using supine Mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) access (16F) in Galdakao-Modified Supine Valdivia position for managing proximal large-volume impacted ureteral calculi as ambulatory day-care surgery vis-a-vis standalone ureteroscopy (URS) with push-back PCNL, if needed. The primary aim was to study the outcomes and stone-free rates (SFRs). Secondary aim was to compare the intraoperative and short-term postoperative complications. Materials and Methods: Data of 60 patients undergoing ECIRS (Group 1) from January 2016 to December 2019 were collected prospectively in a nonrandomized fashion from a single center after Ethics Committee approval. A matched-paired analysis was performed with retrospectively collated data of 60 patients undergoing standard URS/pushback PCNL (Group 2) using analysis of variance, Fisher's exact test, and Chi-square test. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Outcomes and Results: Group 1 patients had a significantly shorter procedure time vs Group 2 (42.1 ± 11.2 minutes vs 52.1 ± 13.7 minutes; p < 0.001). Group 1 (59/60) patients had an overall single stage SFR of 98.3%, which was significantly higher than single-stage SFR of 83% in Group 2 (50/60) ( p < 0.002). Group 2 patients had a higher incidence of fever (10 vs 4, p = 0.01). However, there were no cases of sepsis in either group. Rest of the complications were comparable for both, as the need for ancillary procedures was significantly higher in Group 2 (10% vs 1.7%, p < 0.001). Patients were discharged on the same day in both groups. Conclusions: The findings of our study suggest that, in large and impacted proximal ureteric stones, combined minimally invasive endoscopic approach offers the best option to render the patient stone free by a single intervention. With better intra- and postoperative outcomes and safety profile, Mini-ECIRS may be considered as an ambulatory procedure in this setting. |
