biostudies-literatureUnknown21(4)Radwan AI<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.Arab journal of urology273-279https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC10763587biostudies-literatureComparative study between ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus stented extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of renal stones in Egypt.PMC10763587Samir YRGamal MARadwan AISaif AMIMaged WAfalseComparative study between ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus stented extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of renal stones in Egypt.<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.2023-01-01T00:00:00Z20232025-04-19T19:00:03.327Z2025-04-19T19:00:03.327ZS-EPMC107635873817894410.1080/2090598X.2023.2211897