Author/Authors :
Nihat Karakoyunlu, Ahmet Department of Urology - University of Health Sciences - Diskapi Yildirim Beyazit Training and Research Hospital - Ankara, Turkey , Çaglar Çakıcı, Mehmet Department of Urology - University of Health Sciences - Diskapi Yildirim Beyazit Training and Research Hospital - Ankara, Turkey , Sarı, Sercan Department Of Urology - Bozok University - Yozgat, Turkey , Hepsen, Emre Department of Urology - Çubuk State Hospital - Ankara, Turkey , Ugur Özok, Hakkı Department of Urology - Karabük University - Karabük, Turkey , Levent Sagnak, Azmi Department of Urology - University of Health Sciences - Diskapi Yildirim Beyazit Training and Research Hospital - Ankara, Turkey , Topaloglu, Hikmet Department of Urology - University of Health Sciences - Diskapi Yildirim Beyazit Training and Research Hospital - Ankara, Turkey , Sentürk, Aykut Bugra Department of Urology - Hitit University - Çorum, Turkey , Ersoy, Hamit Department of Urology - University of Health Sciences - Diskapi Yildirim Beyazit Training and Research Hospital - Ankara, Turkey
Abstract :
Purpose: Management of ≥ 4 cm sized kidney stone is a rarely seen problem in urology. Few studies are present
about this issue. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy(PNL), Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery(RIRS) and open surgery are
the methods used in stone management. In our study we aimed to compare RIRS and PNL in the management of
≥ 4 cm sized kidney stones.
Materials and methods: Among patients who had undergone RIRS and PNL in Dıskapı Yıldırım Beyazıt Training
and Research Hospital, 94 patients who had ≥ 4 cm sized kidney stones were included our study. The demographic,
intraoperative and postoperative data of these patients and complications were evaluated retrospectively.
Results: 94 patients (67 PNL, 27 RIRS) were in the study. Stone laterality, urinary anomaly and gender were similar
in two groups.(Group PNL(P) and Group RIRS(R)) Stone number were 2.55 ± 1.44 and 2.78 ± 1.42 in Group
P and R, respectively. Stone size were 47.06 ± 7.02 and 46.41 ± 6.00 mm. in Group P and R, respectively. The
differences between two groups were not statistically significant.(P > .05) In Group P scopy time, hospital stay
and stone free rate were higher and operation time was lower than Group R. and the difference was statistically
significant(P < .05).
Conclusions: As a result, PNL is an effective method and operation time is lower than RIRS. Also a second operation
for JJ stent taking is lower in PNL . RIRS is a safe method. RIRS has less complications and hospitalization
time. They are feasible in treatment of ≥ 4 cm sized kidney stones.
