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 Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

To date, open stone surgery is now performed in a very limited number of selected cases. A review of our own cases revealed that open surgery constituted 1% of all procedures. These procedures were mostly ablative, or operations to deal with complications of failed minimally invasive therapies. Given two continuing trends towards sub-specialisation in urology on the one hand, and minimally invasive therapy on the other, the question arises whether and how sub-specialised stone surgeons should and can learn open stone surgery. Is it merely a lost art not to be bothered with, or is it something worthwhile preserving? This article discusses the pros and cons of the argument and suggests centralisation of complex stone cases as a possible way out of the dilemma.

The (Soon Forgotten) Art of Open Stone Surgery: To Train or Not To Train?