World journal of urology · 2026
Comparison of ultrasonic lithotripsy with Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy during percutaneous nephrolithotomy for 20-40 mm low-hardness renal calculi: a propensity score-matched study.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yue Gaoyuanzhi, Zeng Xueqing, Liu Jiapeng, Liu Renfei, Lin Fuyang, He Tao, Liu Yongda
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of ultrasonic lithotripsy (UL) with an integrated suction system versus holmium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser lithotripsy during percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for treating 20-40 mm low-hardness renal stones using propensity score matching (PSM) analysis.
METHODS: This single-center retrospective cohort study included 436 patients undergoing PCNL for 20-40 mm low-hardness stones. PSM balanced baseline characteristics, comparing patients treated with an ultrasonic lithotripsy system equipped with an integrated suction system (UL group, n = 110) and Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy (Ho:YAG group, n = 110) regarding 1-day/1-month stone-free rates (SFR), operative time, and complications.
RESULTS: The UL group exhibited a significantly higher 1-day SFR (96.36% vs. 85.45%, P = 0.005). The 1-month SFR was numerically higher in the UL group than in the Ho:YAG group (96.36% vs. 90.00%), although the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.061). Complication rates were lower in the UL group (7.27% vs. 22.73%, p = 0.001), particularly for low-grade Clavien I-II events. Postoperative pain (VAS) at 6 h was higher in the UL group (7.24 ± 1.53 vs. 6.67 ± 1.97, p = 0.018), yet comparable at 24/48 hours. Hemoglobin drop, operative time, and hospitalization showed no intergroup differences.
CONCLUSION: UL demonstrates superior early SFR and safety for 20-40 mm low-hardness stones, suggesting that it has the potential to facilitate stentless PCNL. Prospective studies are warranted to validate these findings and optimize clinical protocols.
METHODS: This single-center retrospective cohort study included 436 patients undergoing PCNL for 20-40 mm low-hardness stones. PSM balanced baseline characteristics, comparing patients treated with an ultrasonic lithotripsy system equipped with an integrated suction system (UL group, n = 110) and Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy (Ho:YAG group, n = 110) regarding 1-day/1-month stone-free rates (SFR), operative time, and complications.
RESULTS: The UL group exhibited a significantly higher 1-day SFR (96.36% vs. 85.45%, P = 0.005). The 1-month SFR was numerically higher in the UL group than in the Ho:YAG group (96.36% vs. 90.00%), although the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.061). Complication rates were lower in the UL group (7.27% vs. 22.73%, p = 0.001), particularly for low-grade Clavien I-II events. Postoperative pain (VAS) at 6 h was higher in the UL group (7.24 ± 1.53 vs. 6.67 ± 1.97, p = 0.018), yet comparable at 24/48 hours. Hemoglobin drop, operative time, and hospitalization showed no intergroup differences.
CONCLUSION: UL demonstrates superior early SFR and safety for 20-40 mm low-hardness stones, suggesting that it has the potential to facilitate stentless PCNL. Prospective studies are warranted to validate these findings and optimize clinical protocols.