A comparison of standard PCNL and staged retrograde FURS in pelvis stones over 2 cm in diameter: a prospective randomized study

Karakoyunlu N., Goktug G., Sener N. C., Zengin K., Nalbant I., Ozturk U., ...More

UROLITHIASIS, vol.43, no.3, pp.283-287, 2015 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 43 Issue: 3
  • Publication Date: 2015
  • Doi Number: 10.1007/s00240-015-0768-2
  • Journal Name: UROLITHIASIS
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus
  • Page Numbers: pp.283-287
  • Yozgat Bozok University Affiliated: Yes


The aim of the study was to compare percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and staged retrograde flexible ureteroscopy (FURS) methods used in the treatment of kidney stones of 2 cm or more in diameter. The study comprised a total of 60 patients with a diagnosis of kidney pelvic stones more than 2 cm in diameter, for whom surgery was planned between January 2013 and January 2014. The patients were randomly allocated to two groups as staged retrograde FURS (Group A) and PCNL (Group B). Comparison of the groups was made with respect to operating time, number of procedures, total treatment time, length of hospital stay, stone-free rates and complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. In Group A, the total operating time of multiple sessions was 114.46 min. In Group B, a single session of PCNL was applied to all patients and the mean operating time was 86.8 min (p = 0.014). Mean total treatment time was 2.01 weeks in Group A and 1 week in Group B (p < 0.01). The mean total hospitalization time was 3.66 days in Group A and 3.13 days in Group B (p = 0.037). At the end of the sessions, clinically insignificant residual fragments were observed in ten patients of Group A and one patient of Group B (p = 0.03). No statistically significant difference was determined between the groups in terms of stone-free rates or complications. Although current technology with FURS is effective on large kidney stones, it has no superiority to PCNL due to the need for multiple sessions and long treatment time.