Clinical Trials Logo

Clinical Trial Summary

The optimal management of medium-sized renal stones remains quite challenging and continues to be contested. In the present study, the investigators will compare mini-PNL, RIRS and SWL in the treatment of non- lower pole, medium size, high dense renal stones regarding the stone-free rate, the safety of the procedures, cost, and patients' and surgeon's satisfaction. Eligible patients will be randomly allocated into three equal groups (mini-PNL, RIRS, and SWL). Postoperative, patients will be followed-up by regularly for 3 months. The study parameters will be compared between groups.


Clinical Trial Description

The treatment options for renal stones 10-20 mm include either extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) or endourology (retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL). SWL is an attractive treatment option for renal stones because it is non-invasive and more acceptable for the patient and can be done under analgesia, sedation, or minimal anaesthesia. However, the limitation of SWL includes a relatively lower stone-free rate (SFR) and the need for repeated sessions and auxiliary procedures. The SFR after SWL is affected by several factors, including body mass index (BMI), stone size, intrarenal stone location, skin-to-stone distance (SSD), and stone density. The EAU guidelines put endourology and SWL as two equal options in medium-sized non-lower pole renal stones and did not give special attention to the stone density, which is an important predictor for SWL outcome. Several studies reported that the number of SWL sessions increased with increased stone attenuation value (SAV) and SFR decreased significantly in high-density renal stone. PNL and RIRS have good SFR compared to SWL but might entail a significant risk of morbidity. The improved fURS instrumentation and lithotripsy technology, and development of the miniaturized PNL technique, may lower the procedure-related complications and mPNL and RIRS an alternative and excellent option for medium-sized and even large renal stones The investigators hypothesize that addressing the stone density factor may give a clear recommendation for medium-sized, high-density renal stones. They expected the superiority for either mPNL or RIRS, regarding SFR, without increased morbidity. The study aims to compare the outcome of mPNL, RIRS, and SWL for treatment of non-lower pole, high-density renal stones of 10 to 20 mm size. The study will include adult patients with non-lower pole, high-density (>1000 HU) renal stones of 10 to 20 mm size. Pre-operatively, patients will be evaluated by medical history taking, physical examination. urinalysis, urine culture, complete blood cell count (CBC), liver function tests, coagulation profile, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), serum creatinine, plain abdominal X-ray and computed tomography for urinary tract (CT-UT), Eligible patients will be randomly divided into 3 equal groups. PNL group, in which PNL procedures will be performed using miniature nephroscope, RIRS group, in which RIRS will be performed using flexible ureteroscope and SWL group, in which SWL procedures will be performed using Dornier Lithotripter. post-operatively, patients will be followed up regularly, for 3 months. The SFR, complication rate, cost, patients' and surgeon's satisfaction will be evaluated and compared between the three groups using the appropriate statistical tests and analytical program. ;


Study Design


Related Conditions & MeSH terms


NCT number NCT04856722
Study type Interventional
Source Al-Azhar University
Contact Abul-fotouh Ahmed, MD
Phone 00201001066756
Email abulfotouhahmed@yahoo.com
Status Recruiting
Phase N/A
Start date April 5, 2021
Completion date May 1, 2023

See also
  Status Clinical Trial Phase
Enrolling by invitation NCT06070714 - Efficiency and Safety of Holmium Laser With Moses Technology Versus SuperPulsed Laser System With Thulium Fiber Laser on Renal Stones N/A
Completed NCT04077359 - Prospective Trial for Examining Hematuria Using Computed Tomography N/A
Enrolling by invitation NCT04071340 - The Natural History of Minimally Symptomatic Nonobstructing Calyceal Stones
Completed NCT05589649 - Erector Spinae Versus Paravertebral in Pediatric PCNL N/A
Recruiting NCT05833386 - Effect of Preoperative Silodosin on Feasibility of Ureteral Access Sheath Insertion N/A
Recruiting NCT05634434 - Uric Acid Based Renal Stones: Clinical, Metabolic and Genetic Characterization
Completed NCT03046888 - ROBOTIC PYELOLITHIOTOMY VERSUS PERCUTANEOUS NEPHROLITHOTOMY (PCNL). N/A
Active, not recruiting NCT06110247 - Evaluation of Renal Oxygenation by NIRS in Pediatric Endourologic Stone Surgery
Not yet recruiting NCT06131151 - Comparison Between External Oblique Intercostal Block and Erector Spinae Plane Block in PCNL N/A
Not yet recruiting NCT03939325 - ESWL on Disintegration of Renal Stones
Not yet recruiting NCT04871984 - Effectiveness of Holmium and Thulium Lasers With Ureteroscopy for Urinary Lithiasis
Withdrawn NCT03608098 - Long Pulse Versus Short Pulse Laser Dusting for Renal Stones N/A
Completed NCT02067221 - Comparison of Surgical Outcomes Between MPCNL and RIRS N/A
Active, not recruiting NCT03189264 - Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Treatment of Kidney Stones Greater Than 2 cm N/A
Recruiting NCT06101563 - Duration Between Drainage and Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy N/A
Recruiting NCT05384197 - Enhanced Versus Extended Preoperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis Regimens for Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery in High Infectious Risk Patients Phase 3
Enrolling by invitation NCT05121168 - Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Blocks to Treat Pain Following Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Phase 4
Not yet recruiting NCT06185387 - Changes Post Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
Completed NCT05697341 - Ultra Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy VS Stented Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Stone Management N/A
Completed NCT03349099 - Impact Ureteral Sheath Design During Ureteroscopy N/A