Skip to content

Standard-PCNL vs Mini-PCNL vs Super-mini PCNL for the Treatment of ≥2 cm Renal Stone

An International Multi-center Prospective Cohort Study Comparing the Safety and Efficacy of Super-mini-PCNL, Mini-PCNL and Standard PCNL in the Treatment of ≥2cm Renal Stones

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03771365
Enrollment
3000
Registered
2018-12-11
Start date
2019-01-01
Completion date
2022-01-01
Last updated
2018-12-11

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Stone, Kidney, Lithiasis Renal, Surgery

Keywords

percutaneous nephrostolithotomy, renal stone, safety, efficacy

Brief summary

Background: Standard-PCNL was considered as the first choice for ≥2 cm renal stones. Miniaturized technique Mini-PCNL has also been implicated in the past two decades. Recently, Super-mini PCNL (SMP) was introduced to treated ≤2.5cm renal stone. The miniaturized techniques seemed to take a longer operating time and have risk of getting infectious complications. However, there is no high quality of evidence showing that which kind of PCNL is best or what kind of patients is suitable for standard-PCNL, mini-PCNL or SMP. Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of Standard-PCNL (≥24Fr), Mini-PCNL (12-20Fr) and SMP(10-14Fr) for the treatment of ≥2 cm renal stones Study design: This study is a prospective, observational, international, multicenter registry cohort study Study population: All patients ≥14 years with ≥2 cm renal stone who are planned for Standard-PCNL, Mini-PCNL or SMP are eligible for this study.

Detailed description

BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the first-choice for the treatment of renal stone ≥20 mm with high stone free rate (SFR). However, there are some sever complications such as bleeding. Severe bleeding needs arterial embolization, which might impair the renal function. The size of percutaneous access tract has been proven to be closely related to the risk of bleeding complications. Mini-PCNL was firstly introduced by Jackman in 1998 to treat pediatric renal stone with the aim to lower the morbidity. Mini-PCNL was gradually applied to adults. In recent years, urologists were still attempting to reduce size of the sheath and modify the sheath. They aimed to reduce the risk of bleeding. The first generation SMP consists of a 10-14 F access sheath with a suction-evacuation function and a 7-F nephroscope with enhanced irrigation was introduced by Guohua Zeng's group in 2014. In 2016, Guohua Zeng's group continued to introduce a modified SMP technique and system. The most remarkable feature of the new generation super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (New-SMP) was metal irrigation-suction sheath which made the new system have higher efficiency than the old one. With the modified SMP technique and system, SMP was performed to treat large renal stone. (≥2cm). Moreover, SMP with an irrigation-suction sheath obviously improved the efficiency of removing the fragments and lower the intrapelvic pressure. Although miniaturized techniques decreased the bleeding-related morbidity and have a similar SFR, they seemed to take a longer operating time and have risk of getting infectious complications. However, till now, no high quality of evidence demonstrated that what size of tract is the best for the treatment of ≥2 cm renal stone. Perhaps the investigators should find out a subgroup suitable for standard-PCNL, Mini-PCNL or SMP respectively. STUDY OBJECTIVES The aim of this registry is to review current clinical practice on PCNL for stone treatment. The investigators will explore the answers to the following questions: What kind of PCNL urologists prefers to used? Is there a best cutoff based on the size of stones to divide the patients into subgroups, or a scoring system to decide which kind of PCNL is the best choice for individuals? Primary Objective To compare the stone free rate (SFR) (%) among standard-PCNL, Mini-PCNL and SMP for the treatment of ≥2 cm renal stone. Secondary Objectives 1. Bleeding complication: hematocrit drop (g/L) and rate of transfusion (%). 2. Infectious complication: rate of getting fever (≥38℃) (%) and urosepsis (%). 3. Intraoperative indexes: operating time (mins), rate of tubeless/total tubeless (%). 4. Postoperative indexes: hospital stay (mins), visual analogue scale (VAS) score (range from 0-10, the higher value represents the worse outcome) STUDY DESIGN This study is a prospective, observational, international, multicenter registry cohort study SELECTION AND ENROLLMENT OF PARTICIPANTS Clinical Recruitment All sites for this pilot study are recruited by IAU Members. Each participating center should obtain ethical approval, as needed, according to local regulations. Each participating centre will include all consecutive eligible patients. PCNL procedures are performed according local protocols and surgeons' own propensity. Data will be collected in the IAU online platform (http://47.74.212.47/#/login), which is developed by IAU. Each participating center has own account and password to login and collect data. Data analysis will be coordinated by IAU. Study Population All patients ≥14 years with ≥2 cm renal stone who are planned for Standard-PCNL, Mini-PCNL or SMP are eligible for this study. Surgical procedure The procedure of SMP, mini-PCNL and Standard-PCNL was according to surgeons' propensity, the related details were recorded online.

Interventions

PROCEDUREStandard-PCNL

percutaneous nephrostolithotomy (PCNL) with ≥24 Fr access tract for the treatment of ≥2 cm renal stone

PROCEDUREMini-PCNL

percutaneous nephrostolithotomy (PCNL) with 12-20 Fr access tract for the treatment of ≥2 cm renal stone

PROCEDURESMP

percutaneous nephrostolithotomy (PCNL) with 10-14 Fr access tract for the treatment of ≥2 cm renal stone

Sponsors

Military Medical Academy, Bulgaria
CollaboratorOTHER
Massachusetts General Hospital
CollaboratorOTHER
Hospital de Clinicas José de San Martín
CollaboratorOTHER
Goldstadt Private Clinic
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
University College London Hospitals
CollaboratorOTHER
Hospital de Base do Distrito Federal
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Mexican National Council of Urology
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Vancouver General Hospital
CollaboratorOTHER
Lions Kidney Hospital and Urology Institute
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Mt. Carmel Diocesan General Hospital
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Clinical Emergency County Hospital
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
University of Belgrade
CollaboratorOTHER
Hospital das Clínicas, University of Sao Paulo Medical School
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Vayodha and Venus International Hospitals
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
University Hospital of Vinalopo
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Sismanoglio General Hospital
CollaboratorOTHER
New Mowasat Hospital
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
14 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Patient ≥14 years old * Patient is a candidate for Standard-PCNL, Mini-PCNL or SMP treatment of a renal stone

Exclusion criteria

* Patient \<14 years old

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Stone free rate (SFR) (%)1-3 months after the day of DJ stent/ureteral catheter removal or the day of operation (if no DJ stent or ureteral catheter placed postoperatively).Stone free rate (SFR) (%) are defined as either the absence of any residual stone fragments or the presence of clinically insignificant residual stone fragments in the kidney which were defined as ≦ 4mm, asymptomatic, non-obstructive and non-infectious stone particles.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Perioperative complicationsintraoperatively or ≤ 1 month postoperativelyComplication is defined as any adverse event occurred intraoperatively or ≤1 month postoperatively, including intraoperative bleeding, postoperative pain and so on

Contacts

Primary ContactGuohua Zeng, PH.D & MD
gzgyzgh@vip.sina.com+86 13802916676
Backup ContactChao Cai, PH.D & MD
673059209@qq.com+86 13512780911

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026