Publication:
Propensity score-matched analysis comparing retrograde intrarenal surgery with percutaneous nephrolithotomy in anomalous kidneys

dc.contributor.authorTANIDIR, YILÖREN
dc.contributor.authorsLim E. J., Yuen-Chun Teoh J., Fong K. Y., Emiliani E., Gadzhiev N., Gorelov D., Tanıdır Y., Sepulveda F., Al-Terki A., Khadgi S., et al.
dc.date.accessioned2023-06-12T10:30:28Z
dc.date.accessioned2026-01-11T13:36:15Z
dc.date.available2023-06-12T10:30:28Z
dc.date.issued2022-05-01
dc.description.abstractPurpose: To evaluate the clinical efficacy, safety, and cost of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in the treatment for large renal stones in patients with a solitary kidney. Patients and Methods: In this study, 117 patients with a solitary kidney who had undergone PCNL or RIRS for renal stones larger than 2 cm between January 2010 and December 2016 were retrospectively evaluated. The patients' demographic data, clinical characteristics, and perioperative outcomes were collected through a review of their medical records. Forty-three patients treated with PCNL were compared to 43 patients treated with RIRS by propensity score-matched analysis. The stone-free rate, retreatment rate, complication rate, and efficacy quotient (EQ) were assessed in both groups. Results: Initial stone-free rate of the PCNL group after a single procedure was significantly higher compared with the RIRS group (74.42% vs 34.88%, p < 0.001), whereas there was no significant difference in the final stone-free rate after repeated procedures (90.70% vs 88.37%, p = 0.713). PCNL had a significantly lower retreatment rate than RIRS (16.28% vs 63.79%, p < 0.001), and the PCNL group underwent fewer procedures than the RIRS group (p < 0.001). Thus, PCNL group had a higher EQ (78.00% vs 53.52%). Although cost per procedure of PCNL was significantly higher compared with RIRS (p < 0.001), the total costs were comparable. Complication rate of RIRS was lower compared with PCNL with no statistical significance (p = 0.193), and acute kidney injury rates were also comparable (PCNL vs RIRS: 13.95% vs 6.98%, p = 0.533). Conclusions: With fewer repeated surgical procedures, higher EQ, and comparable total costs, PCNL is recommended as the first choice for the treatment of large renal calculi in patients with a solitary kidney. As for specific indications such as anticoagulant drugs, RIRS is a safer choice with fewer complications and acceptable final stone-free rate.
dc.identifier.citationLim E. J., Yuen-Chun Teoh J., Fong K. Y., Emiliani E., Gadzhiev N., Gorelov D., Tanıdır Y., Sepulveda F., Al-Terki A., Khadgi S., et al., "PROPENSITY SCORE-MATCHED ANALYSIS COMPARING RETROGRADE INTRARENAL SURGERY WITH PERCUTANEOUS NEPHROLITHOTOMY IN ANOMALOUS KIDNEYS", JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, cilt.207, sa.Supplement 5, ss.236, 2022
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/ju.0000000000002543.11
dc.identifier.endpage236
dc.identifier.issn0022-5347
dc.identifier.issueSupplement 5
dc.identifier.startpage236
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.jurology.com/doi/pdf/10.1097/JU.0000000000002543.11
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11424/290166
dc.identifier.volume207
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofJOURNAL OF UROLOGY
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.subjectTıp
dc.subjectSağlık Bilimleri
dc.subjectCerrahi Tıp Bilimleri
dc.subjectÜroloji
dc.subjectMedicine
dc.subjectHealth Sciences
dc.subjectSurgery Medicine Sciences
dc.subjectUrology
dc.subjectKlinik Tıp (MED)
dc.subjectKlinik Tıp
dc.subjectÜROLOJİ VE NEFROLOJİ
dc.subjectCERRAHİ
dc.subjectClinical Medicine (MED)
dc.subjectCLINICAL MEDICINE
dc.subjectUROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
dc.subjectSURGERY
dc.subjectNefroloji
dc.subjectCerrahi
dc.subjectNephrology
dc.subjectSurgery
dc.subjectsolitary kidney
dc.subjectrenal calculi
dc.subjectpercutaneous nephrolithotomy
dc.subjectretrograde intrarenal surgery
dc.titlePropensity score-matched analysis comparing retrograde intrarenal surgery with percutaneous nephrolithotomy in anomalous kidneys
dc.typearticle
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files