{"database":"biostudies-literature","file_versions":[],"scores":null,"additional":{"omics_type":["Unknown"],"volume":["21(4)"],"submitter":["Radwan AI"],"pubmed_abstract":["<h4>Objectives</h4>The purpose of this study is to compare results, safety and outcome of ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) versus stented shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) for the management of renal calculi sized 10-20 mm.<h4>Methods</h4>This study was conducted at Urology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University. After meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria, 90 patients were randomized to either ultra-mini-PCNL group or stented SWL group through the closed-envelope technique, with 45 patients in each group. Patient data were collected preoperatively, immediately postoperatively and 2 and 4 weeks postoperatively assessing operative time, hospital stay, complications including haematuria, fever, the need for blood transfusion, residual stones and the need for retreatment.<h4>Results</h4>Stone-free rate (SFR) was higher in the ultra-mini-PCNL group compared to the stented SWL group, with no statistically significant difference with <i>P</i>-value = 0.316. As for the need for retreatment, it was slightly higher in the stented SWL group compared to the ultra-mini-PCNL group, yet this difference was statistically insignificant with <i>P</i>-value = 0.681.We found no statistically significant difference between both groups regarding post-operative complications including fever, haematuria and need for blood transfusion, respectively.Operative time and hospital stay were significantly higher in the ultra-mini-PCNL group compared to the stented SWL group with <i>P</i>-value < 0.001 for both.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Both stented SWL and ultra-mini-PCNL are good treatment choices for renal stones sized less than 2 cm with low complication rates. Stone size indices were significant predictor for the need for retreatment. Further studies to compare SFR based on stone size in both interventions are needed."],"journal":["Arab journal of urology"],"pagination":["273-279"],"full_dataset_link":["https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC10763587"],"repository":["biostudies-literature"],"pubmed_title":["Comparative study between ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus stented extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of renal stones in Egypt."],"pmcid":["PMC10763587"],"pubmed_authors":["Samir YR","Gamal MA","Radwan AI","Saif AMI","Maged WA"],"additional_accession":[]},"is_claimable":false,"name":"Comparative study between ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus stented extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of renal stones in Egypt.","description":"<h4>Objectives</h4>The purpose of this study is to compare results, safety and outcome of ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) versus stented shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) for the management of renal calculi sized 10-20 mm.<h4>Methods</h4>This study was conducted at Urology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University. After meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria, 90 patients were randomized to either ultra-mini-PCNL group or stented SWL group through the closed-envelope technique, with 45 patients in each group. Patient data were collected preoperatively, immediately postoperatively and 2 and 4 weeks postoperatively assessing operative time, hospital stay, complications including haematuria, fever, the need for blood transfusion, residual stones and the need for retreatment.<h4>Results</h4>Stone-free rate (SFR) was higher in the ultra-mini-PCNL group compared to the stented SWL group, with no statistically significant difference with <i>P</i>-value = 0.316. As for the need for retreatment, it was slightly higher in the stented SWL group compared to the ultra-mini-PCNL group, yet this difference was statistically insignificant with <i>P</i>-value = 0.681.We found no statistically significant difference between both groups regarding post-operative complications including fever, haematuria and need for blood transfusion, respectively.Operative time and hospital stay were significantly higher in the ultra-mini-PCNL group compared to the stented SWL group with <i>P</i>-value < 0.001 for both.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Both stented SWL and ultra-mini-PCNL are good treatment choices for renal stones sized less than 2 cm with low complication rates. Stone size indices were significant predictor for the need for retreatment. Further studies to compare SFR based on stone size in both interventions are needed.","dates":{"release":"2023-01-01T00:00:00Z","publication":"2023","modification":"2025-04-19T19:00:03.327Z","creation":"2025-04-19T19:00:03.327Z"},"accession":"S-EPMC10763587","cross_references":{"pubmed":["38178944"],"doi":["10.1080/2090598X.2023.2211897"]}}