English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Objective   Comparison of outcomes between RIRS with vacuum-assisted ureteral access sheath (V-UAS) and MPCNL in the treatment of renal stone.Materials and Methods   28 patients with 2-4 cm renal stone were treated using RIRS with 14/16 F V-UAS. The outcomes were compared to those who underwent MPCNL with 16 F Amplatz sheath using a matched-pair analysis in a 1 : 2 scenario. Matching criteria included stone size, location and laterality, gender, age, BMI, and degree of hydronephrosis. Patients' demographics, perioperative and postoperative characteristics, complications, stone-free rate (SFR), and auxiliary procedures were compared.Results   Mean operative times for the RIRS and MPCNL groups were 72.4 ± 21.3 minutes and 67.4 ± 25 minutes ( P  = 0.042). Postoperative pain was significantly less in the RIRS group. The initial SFR was 50% for the RIRS group and 73.2% for the MPCNL group ( P  = 0.035). The final SFR at postoperative three months improved to 89.3% for the RIRS group and 92.9% for the MPCNL group ( P  = 0.681). The auxiliary procedure rates were higher in the RIRS group (42.9% vs. 25%,  P  = 0.095). The overall complication rate in the RIRS group was lower, but the significant difference was not found.Conclusion   In the treatment of 2-4 cm renal stone, using V-UAS in RIRS can improve surgical efficiency with lower postoperative early pain scores. Comparing with MPCNL, its initial SFR was more depressed, and there is still a trend towards requiring more auxiliary procedures to achieve comparable final SFR.

RIRS with Vacuum-Assisted Ureteral Access Sheath versus MPCNL for the Treatment of 2-4 cm Renal Stone