Kidney stones can be extremely painful and may require medical attention for removal. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy is a common procedure done for large renal stones that cannot be removed by medication. However, achieving complete stone clearance can be difficult in large and complex stones.
A clinical study has compared the effectiveness of two common techniques for kidney stone removal i.e. Endoscopic Combined Intrarenal Surgery (ECIRS) and Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL).
Kidney stones are a common condition that affects millions of people worldwide. While small stones can be passed naturally, larger and more complex stones may require medical intervention. Two commonly employed procedures for treating large and complex renal stones are ECIRS and PCNL.
PCNL is a minimally invasive procedure to remove kidney stones. It involves making a small incision in the flank region through which a camera and working element are passed into the kidney to fragment and remove renal stones.
ECIRS involves two procedures: a PCNL and a retrograde intrarenal surgery where a scope is passed via the urethra up to the kidney and the stones are fragmented.
Clinical StudyThis clinical study, published in the Journal of Endourology, has compared the effectiveness of these two procedures in treating kidney stones.
The study analyzed data from multiple clinical trials involving a number of patients with large and complex renal stones. These patients underwent either ECIRS or PCNL. The stone-free rate was measured as the primary outcome while average operating time, hemoglobin drop, and complication rate were the secondary outcomes.
The researchers found that both procedures were effective in treating large and complex renal stones, however, when compared, ECIRS was found to have some advantages over PCNL.
The results of the study showed that the stone-free rate of ECIRS was significantly higher compared with PCNL while the complication rate was significantly lower for ECIRS. The study found that ECIRS was associated with a lower risk of postoperative complications, such as fever and infection. The clinical study also found that the average operating time and blood loss were similar in both procedures.
Overall, the study suggests that ECIRS may be a preferable option for treating large and complex renal stones. However, the choice of procedure ultimately depends on several factors, including the size and location of the stone, the patient's medical history, and the surgeon's experience.
ConclusionThe clinical study suggests that ECIRS may be a better option than PCNL for treating large and complex renal stones as it provides better stone clearance and has a lower risk of complications. However, the patients need to discuss their options with their doctor to make an informed decision about their treatment.
Journal of Endourology, Jul-05-22