Résumé
Objective To evaluate the efficacy of the retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyelolithotomy (RLP) and the percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in treating renal pelvic stone.Methods The data of 89 patients diagnosed as renal pelvic stone were retrospectively reviewed from January 2009 to July 2016,of whom 43 patients underwent RLP and 46 underwent PCNL.Statistical analysis was performed regarding operation time,blood loss,mean hospital stay,complication rate,and stone-free rate.Results The operation time in RLP group and PCNL group was (117.5 ± 16.7) min and (118.3 ± 16.6) min,respectively,and there was no significant difference (P =0.547).For the two groups,the mean hospital stay was (4.5 ± 0.5) d and (6.1 ± 0.9) d,the mean hemoglobin decrease was (4.5 ± 1.2) g/L and (18.1 ± 3.4) g/L,the post-operative blood transfusion rate was 2.3％ and 14.0％,the post-operative septic shock rate was 0 and 9.3％,respectively,with significant difference between the two groups (P ＜ 0.05).The stone-free rate in both groups was 97.7％ and 95.3％ with no significant difference (P =0.557).Conclusions RLP has the advantages of quick recovery,less blood loss and lower complication rate than PCNL.It could be a minimally invasive option for the treatment of renal pelvic stone.
Résumé
<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To compare the safety, efficacy and complications of laparoscopic pyelolithotomy (LPL) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for treatment of renal pelvic stones larger than 2.5 cm.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>From 2011 to 2016, 32 patients underwent LPL and another 32 patients received PCNL for renal pelvic stones larger than 2.5 cm. The baseline characteristics of the patients, stone size, mean operative time, estimated blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, stone-free rate, postoperative analgesia, blood transfusion, and the intraoperative, early postoperative and long-term complications were compared between the two groups.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>The baseline characteristics and stone size were comparable between the two groups. The mean operative time of LPL and PCNL was 117∓23.12 and 118.16∓25.45 min, respectively (P>0.05). The two groups showed significant differences in the mean estimated blood loss (63∓11.25 vs 122∓27.78 mL, P<0.01) and blood transfusion rate (0 vs 6.2%, P<0.01) but not in postoperative hospital stay (4.5∓1.34 vs 4.8∓2.2 days, P>0.05), stone-free rate (93.1% vs 87.5%, P>0.05) or the postoperative analgesia time (1.7∓0.5 and 1.9∓0.6 days, P>0.05). The incidence of intraoperative complications were significant lower in LPL group than in PCNL group (6.2% vs 25.0%, P<0.01), but the incidences of early postoperative complications (25.0% vs 34.4%, P>0.05) and long-term postoperative complications (9.4% vs 12.5%, P>0.05) were similar between them.</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>PCNL is the standard treatment for pelvic stones larger than 2.5 cm, but for urologists experienced with laparoscopic technique, LPL provides a feasible and safe option for management of such cases.</p>