Abstract
Objectives
To evaluate the association between operative time (OT) and postoperative complications after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in elderly patients, and to identify a clinically meaningful OT threshold for risk stratification.
Patients and Methods
A retrospective international multicentre study was performed including patients aged ≥70 years who underwent PCNL between January 2014 and February 2025 across 21 centres in 15 countries. Postoperative complications within 30 days were analysed as overall, major, and infectious events. The optimal OT threshold was determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, whereas the association between OT and postoperative outcomes was evaluated using multivariable logistic regression and adjusted restricted cubic spline models.
Results
Among 716 patients, 120 (16.8%) developed postoperative complications; 49 (6.8%) had major and 49 (6.8%) infectious complications. ROC analysis identified a common OT threshold around 95 min. An OT ≥95 min was independently associated with overall complications (odds ratio [OR] 3.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.16–5.26), major complications (OR 2.63, 95% CI 1.35–5.10), and infectious complications (OR 3.79, 95% CI 1.90–7.57). The highest discriminative performance was observed for infectious complications (multivariable model area under the curve 0.77). Restricted cubic spline analysis confirmed significant non‐linear associations between OT and all outcomes, with a steeper increase in adjusted complication probability beyond approximately 90–100 min. Non‐papillary puncture was independently associated with all complication types, while positive preoperative urine culture predicted infectious complications.
Conclusions
In elderly patients undergoing PCNL, prolonged OT was independently associated with higher odds of overall, major, and infectious postoperative complications. The relationship was non‐linear, with a clinically relevant threshold around 95 min, supporting OT as a practical intraoperative marker for risk stratification and procedural planning.
Keywords: percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), elderly patients, operative time, complications, risk stratification
Abbreviations
- AUC
area under the curve
- EAU
European Association of Urology
- ECIRS
endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery
- IQR
interquartile range
- OR
odds ratio
- OT
operative time
- PCNL
percutaneous nephrolithotomy
- (N)(P)PV
(negative) (positive) predictive value
- ROC
receiver operating characteristic
- SFR
stone‐free rate
- SIRS
systemic inflammatory response syndrome
Introduction
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) remains the standard treatment for large and complex renal calculi, offering high stone‐free rates (SFRs) despite a non‐negligible risk of serious postoperative adverse events [1]. Accordingly, the identification of perioperative factors influencing procedural risk remains clinically important. Operative time (OT) is of particular interest because, unlike many patient‐ and stone‐related characteristics, it may represent a partly modifiable procedural factor. Growing evidence from adult and paediatric populations suggests that prolonged OT is associated with worse outcomes after PCNL, including major and infectious complications [2, 3]. However, the ‘safe’ OT thresholds proposed in the literature remain inconsistent. In addition, recent studies suggest that the relationship between OT and postoperative risk may not be purely linear [2].
The ongoing global trend toward population ageing has resulted in an increasing number of elderly patients requiring active surgical treatment for kidney stones, including PCNL [4, 5]. Because elderly patients often present with a greater burden of comorbidity and reduced physiological reserve, they may be particularly vulnerable to perioperative stress and postoperative complications [6]. In this context, OT may represent an especially relevant procedural factor, and the identification of clinically meaningful safety thresholds appears important for risk stratification and treatment planning. However, data specifically addressing this issue in elderly patients remain scarce, with a particular paucity of robust international multicentre evidence.
Therefore, the aim of the present multicentre study was to evaluate the association between OT and postoperative complications after PCNL in elderly patients and to identify a clinically meaningful OT threshold for risk stratification.
Patients and Methods
Retrospective multicentre data were collected for the Safety and Efficacy of Nephrolithotomy in Older patients undergoing PCNL (SENIOR‐PCNL) study. Patients underwent PCNL for renal or upper ureteric calculi between January 2014 and February 2025 across 21 centres from 15 countries participating in the international European Association of Urology‐Young Academic Urologists (EAU‐YAU) Endourology collaborative network. Data were collected using a standardised spreadsheet template circulated to all participating centres together with written definitions for each variable, in order to ensure uniform interpretation across sites. Records were reviewed and entered exclusively by the co‐authors of the present study, all of whom are practising urologists at the participating institutions. Completed datasets were returned to the coordinating centre (Wroclaw Medical University), where they were merged and screened centrally for missing values, out‐of‐range entries, and internal inconsistencies.
Patients were excluded a priori if they had anatomical or functional abnormalities of the urinary tract predisposing to altered infectious or procedural risk, namely neurogenic bladder, urinary diversion or bladder augmentation, renal transplantation, and congenital renal anomalies including horseshoe, ectopic, or malrotated kidney. All centres were high‐volume institutions with established experience in endourological stone surgery. Ethical or institutional approval was obtained according to local regulations at each participating centre, and all data were anonymised prior to central analysis. To avoid within‐patient dependence arising from repeated procedures, only one procedure per patient was included.
Despite varying literature‐based thresholds used to define elderly populations, patients aged ≥70 years were considered elderly in the present study, as this cut‐off is consistent with contemporary population‐level ageing analyses and better reflects the stage at which comorbidity burden and reduced physiological reserve become clinically relevant [7]. Recorded variables included demographics, comorbidity burden, stone characteristics, preoperative urine culture status, preoperative hydronephrosis, preoperative urinary drainage, and other relevant perioperative parameters. Stone burden was assessed using the single largest stone diameter, cumulative stone diameter, and estimated stone volume calculated with the ellipsoid formula (length × width × depth × π × 0.167). Cumulative stone diameter was calculated as the sum of the maximal diameters of all stones identified on preoperative imaging. Procedural variables included patient positioning, tract size, lithotripsy device, and exit strategy. OT was recorded as the interval from renal puncture to completion of the procedure, including nephrostomy tube placement, ureteric stenting, or tubeless tract closure according to the selected exit strategy. Stone composition analysis was performed, where available, according to local institutional protocols. Owing to the retrospective multicentre design, analytical methods were not standardised across centres, and stones were classified according to their predominant component.
The SFR was assessed according to local imaging protocols, including CT, plain radiography of the kidney–ureter–bladder, and/or ultrasonography. In view of the retrospective multicentre design and expected variability in imaging follow‐up and reporting across centres, only zero residual fragment status on postoperative imaging was considered stone‐free for the purpose of analysis.
The primary outcomes were postoperative complications within 30 days. Complications were graded according to the modified Clavien–Dindo classification validated for PCNL [8] and analysed as overall (Clavien–Dindo Grade I–V), major (Clavien–Dindo Grade III–V), and infectious complications. Infectious complications were defined as postoperative UTI or sepsis according to standard clinical and laboratory criteria.
Statistical Analysis
All statistical analyses were performed using R software, version 4.5.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).
Normality of continuous variables was assessed using the Shapiro–Wilk test. Because all continuous variables were not normally distributed, they were summarised as median and interquartile range (IQR) and compared using the Mann–Whitney U test. Categorical variables were presented as counts and percentages and compared using the chi‐square test or Fisher's exact test, as appropriate.
The discriminatory ability of OT for each outcome was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The area under the curve (AUC) with 95% CIs was calculated, and the optimal cut‐off value was determined by maximising the Youden index. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative PV (NPV) were also determined. To assess the stability of the identified threshold, bootstrap re‐sampling was performed.
Associations between OT and postoperative complications were assessed using logistic regression models. Univariable logistic regression was first performed for each outcome. Subsequently, multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to estimate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs, including variables with a P ≤ 0.1 in univariable analyses. OT was examined both as a continuous variable and as a categorical variable according to the ROC‐derived threshold. The discriminative performance of the multivariable models was further evaluated by calculating AUCs based on model‐predicted probabilities.
Given the potentially non‐linear relationship between OT and postoperative complication risk, adjusted restricted cubic spline models were fitted, with OT entered as a continuous variable using a four‐knot restricted cubic spline. For each outcome, spline models were adjusted for the same covariates as the corresponding multivariable logistic regression models. Overall association and departure from linearity were assessed by analysis of variance of the fitted models, with the P value for the non‐linear component used as the formal test for non‐linearity. For graphical presentation, adjusted predicted probabilities and adjusted ORs relative to the 95‐min threshold were estimated, together with their 95% CIs.
All tests were two‐sided, and a P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results
Among 716 elderly patients undergoing PCNL, 120 (16.8%) experienced at least one postoperative complication type. Table 1 presents the baseline demographic, clinical, stone‐related, and perioperative characteristics of the study cohort, stratified by overall, major, and infectious complications. In total, 136 Clavien–Dindo Grade I–V complication events were recorded (Table S1A), indicating that several patients developed more than one complication. Major and infectious complications were each observed in 49 (6.8%) patients. Patients with overall, major, and infectious complications all had significantly longer OT (median [IQR] 112.5 [85–131.25] vs 80 [55–120] min, P < 0.001; 102 [80–130] vs 86 [55–120] min, P = 0.007; and 118 [90–135] vs 85 [55–120] min, P < 0.001, respectively), longer hospital stay, and lower SFR (Table 1).
Table 1.
Baseline demographic, stone‐related, and perioperative characteristics stratified by overall, major, and infectious complications.
| Variable | Overall complications | Major complications | Infectious complications | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No (n = 596) | Yes (n = 120) | P | No (n = 667) | Yes (n = 49) | P | No (n = 667) | Yes (n = 49) | P | |
| Age, years, median (IQR) | 74 (71–77) | 75 (72–77.25) | 0.020 | 74 (71–77) | 75 (72–77) | 0.209 | 74 (71–77) | 75 (73–77) | 0.095 |
| Sex, male n (%) | 296 (49.7) | 68 (56.7) | 0.193 | 330 (49.5) | 34 (69.4) | 0.008 | 336 (50.4) | 28 (57.1) | 0.378 |
| BMI, kg/m2, median (IQR) | 27 (24.26–29.6) | 26.7 (24.6–29) | 0.644 | 26.92 (24.3–29.4) | 27 (24.2–29.1) | 0.916 | 27 (24.3–29.4) | 26 (24.3–29.3) | 0.736 |
| ASA grade, n (%) | |||||||||
| I | 82 (13.8) | 7 (5.8) | 0.035 | 86 (12.9) | 3 (6.1) | 0.401 | 84 (12.6) | 5 (10.2) | 0.440 |
| II | 304 (51.0) | 66 (55.0) | 345 (51.7) | 25 (51.0) | 346 (51.9) | 24 (49.0) | |||
| III | 196 (32.9) | 41 (34.2) | 218 (32.7) | 19 (38.8) | 220 (33.0) | 17 (34.7) | |||
| IV | 14 (2.3) | 6 (5.0) | 18 (2.7) | 2 (4.1) | 17 (2.5) | 3 (6.1) | |||
| ACCI score, median (IQR) | 3 (3–4) | 3 (3–4.75) | 0.933 | 3 (3–4) | 3 (3–5) | 0.247 | 3 (3–4) | 3 (2–5) | 0.487 |
| AC/AP drug use, yes, n (%) | 182 (30.5) | 40 (33.3) | 0.589 | 209 (31.3) | 13 (26.5) | 0.526 | 208 (31.2) | 14 (28.6) | 0.752 |
| Hypertension, yes, n (%) | 345 (57.9) | 69 (57.5) | 1 | 385 (57.7) | 29 (59.2) | 0.882 | 388 (58.2) | 26 (53.1) | 0.549 |
| Diabetes mellitus, yes, n (%) | 205 (34.4) | 36 (30.0) | 0.397 | 226 (33.9) | 15 (30.6) | 0.755 | 226 (33.9) | 15 (30.6) | 0.755 |
| Preoperative urine culture, positive, n (%) | 218 (36.6) | 47 (39.2) | 0.605 | 247 (37.0) | 18 (36.7) | 1 | 237 (35.5) | 28 (57.1) | 0.003 |
| Duration of preoperative antibiotic therapy in patients with a positive urine culture, days, median (IQR) | 2 (1–3) | 2 (1–4) | 0.438 | 2 (1–3) | 2 (1–4) | 0.517 | 2 (1–3) | 2 (2–4) | 0.184 |
| Preoperative hydronephrosis, yes, n (%) | 253 (42.4) | 57 (47.5) | 0.314 | 292 (43.8) | 18 (36.7) | 0.373 | 287 (43.0) | 23 (46.9) | 0.655 |
| Preoperative JJ/nephrostomy stent, yes, n (%) | 197 (33.1) | 49 (40.8) | 0.102 | 225 (33.7) | 21 (42.9) | 0.194 | 230 (34.5) | 16 (32.7) | 0.795 |
| Single largest stone size, mm, median (IQR) | 22 (17–30) | 27 (17–32.5) | 0.024 | 23 (17–30) | 25 (16–32) | 0.895 | 22.17 (17–30) | 27 (19–35) | 0.015 |
| Stone density, Hounsfield units, median (IQR) | 1035 (716–1312) | 1003 (733.5–1256) | 0.394 | 1031 (716–1300) | 1047 (733.5–1384) | 0.613 | 1035 (742–1305.75) | 991 (541–1300) | 0.260 |
| Cumulative stone size, mm, median (IQR) | 32 (26–43) | 36 (29–50) | 0.106 | 32 (26.375–44) | 37.5 (29.35–50.75) | 0.106 | 32 (26–43.25) | 48.75 (32.25–55.75) | 0.006 |
| Stone volume, mm3, median (IQR) | 2270 (1155–4976) | 3011 (1269–5759) | 0.163 | 2356 (1224–5041) | 2368 (1011–5616) | 0.822 | 2288 (1154–5041) | 3510 (1655–8086) | 0.020 |
| Multiple stones, yes, n (%) | 271 (45.5) | 44 (36.7) | 0.087 | 295 (44.2) | 20 (40.8) | 0.658 | 301 (45.1) | 14 (28.6) | 0.026 |
| Staghorn stone, yes, n (%) | 144 (24.2) | 43 (35.8) | 0.012 | 168 (25.2) | 19 (38.8) | 0.043 | 166 (24.9) | 21 (42.9) | 0.010 |
| Operative position, n (%) | |||||||||
| Supine | 476 (79.9) | 103 (85.8) | 0.161 | 540 (81.0) | 39 (79.6) | 0.851 | 536 (80.4) | 43 (87.8) | 0.260 |
| Prone | 120 (20.1) | 17 (14.2) | 127 (19.0) | 10 (20.4) | 131 (19.6) | 6 (12.2) | |||
| Tract size, n (%) | |||||||||
| Mini PCNL (12–22 F) | 389 (65.3) | 69 (57.5) | 0.118 | 424 (63.6) | 34 (69.4) | 0.445 | 427 (64.0) | 31 (63.3) | 1 |
| Standard PCNL (24–30 F) | 207 (34.7) | 51 (42.5) | 243 (36.4) | 15 (30.6) | 240 (36.0) | 18 (36.7) | |||
| Puncture site, non‐papillary, n (%) | 56 (9.4) | 21 (17.5) | 0.014 | 66 (9.9) | 11 (22.4) | 0.014 | 66 (9.9) | 11 (22.4) | 0.014 |
| ECIRS, yes, n (%) | 192 (32.2) | 43 (35.8) | 0.457 | 212 (31.8) | 23 (46.9) | 0.039 | 217 (32.5) | 18 (36.7) | 0.533 |
| Fragmentation device, n (%) | |||||||||
| Laser | 353 (59.2) | 58 (48.3) | 0.058 | 388 (58.2) | 23 (46.9) | 0.183 | 386 (57.9) | 25 (51.0) | 0.124 |
| Pneumatic/ultrasonic | 231 (38.8) | 58 (48.3) | 265 (39.7) | 24 (49.0) | 268 (40.2) | 21 (42.9) | |||
| Other | 12 (2.0) | 4 (3.3) | 14 (2.1) | 2 (4.1) | 13 (1.9) | 3 (6.1) | |||
| Exit strategy, n (%) | |||||||||
| Totally tubeless | 29 (4.9) | 4 (3.3) | <0.001 | 31 (4.6) | 2 (4.1) | 0.405 | 31 (4.6) | 2 (4.1) | 0.019 |
| JJ stent only | 295 (49.5) | 40 (33.3) | 314 (47.1) | 21 (42.9) | 319 (47.8) | 16 (32.7) | |||
| Nephrostomy tube only | 111 (18.6) | 19 (15.8) | 124 (18.6) | 6 (12.2) | 124 (18.6) | 6 (12.2) | |||
| Both JJ stent and nephrostomy tube | 161 (27.0) | 57 (47.5) | 198 (29.7) | 20 (40.8) | 193 (28.9) | 25 (51.0) | |||
| OT, min, median (IQR) | 80 (55–120) | 112.5 (85–131.25) | <0.001 | 86 (55–120) | 102 (80–130) | 0.007 | 85 (55–120) | 118 (90–135) | <0.001 |
| Length of hospital stay, days, median (IQR) | 3 (2–4) | 5 (3.75–8) | <0.001 | 3 (2–4) | 5 (3–9) | <0.001 | 3 (2–4) | 7 (4–10) | <0.001 |
| SFR, n (%) | 453 (76.0) | 75 (62.5) | 0.003 | 499 (74.8) | 29 (59.2) | 0.027 | 498 (74.7) | 30 (61.2) | 0.044 |
| Postoperative imaging, n (%) | |||||||||
| CT | 364 (61.1) | 74 (61.7) | 0.903 | 404 (60.6) | 34 (69.4) | 0.222 | 408 (61.2) | 30 (61.2) | 0.994 |
| KUB and/or ultrasonography | 232 (38.9) | 46 (38.3) | 263 (39.4) | 15 (30.6) | 259 (38.8) | 19 (38.8) | |||
Continuous variables are presented as median (IQR).
AC/AP, anticoagulant/antiplatelet; ACCI, age‐adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index; ASA, American Society of Anaesthesiologists; BMI, body mass index; ECIRS, endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery; KUB, plain radiography of the kidney–ureter–bladder.
Statistically significant results are presented in bold.
As a single predictor, OT demonstrated modest discrimination for overall, major, and infectious complications, with AUCs of 0.64, 0.62, and 0.65, respectively. The optimal Youden‐derived cut‐offs were highly similar across endpoints, ranging from 93 to 95 min, with sensitivities of 0.67–0.71 and specificities of 0.58–0.61 (Fig. 1). The PPVs were low across all outcomes (10.6–26.2%), whereas the NPVs were consistently high (90.6–96.7%). Detailed ROC metrics are provided in Table S2. Bootstrap analyses across all three outcomes consistently indicated an optimal OT threshold between 90 and 100 min; therefore, a common cut‐off of 95 min was selected for subsequent analyses (Fig. S1A). After stratification of the cohort by the pre‐defined 95‐min OT threshold (Table S3), procedures lasting ≥95 min (n = 311 [43.4%]) were characterised by greater stone and procedural complexity, including larger stone size (26 vs 21 mm, P < 0.001), higher stone volume (3290 vs 1900 mm3, P < 0.001), more frequent staghorn calculi (38.9% vs 16.3%, P < 0.001), and higher endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery (ECIRS) use (44.1% vs 24.2%, P < 0.001).
Fig. 1.

The ROC curves for OT as a predictor of postoperative complications after PCNL. (A) For overall complications. (B) For major complications. (C) For infectious complications. For each outcome, the AUC and the optimal Youden‐derived cut‐off are displayed.
Results of the univariable logistic regression analyses are presented in Table S4. Detailed results of all multivariable models are provided in Table 2. An OT ≥95 min was associated with increased odds of overall complications (OR 3.37, 95% CI 2.16–5.26; P < 0.001), together with non‐papillary puncture (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.19–3.85; P = 0.018). In the model for major complications, an OT ≥95 min (OR 2.63, 95% CI 1.35–5.10; P = 0.004), male sex (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.16–4.21; P = 0.015), and non‐papillary puncture (OR 2.76, 95% CI 1.30–5.86; P = 0.008) remained significantly associated. In the model for infectious complications, significant associations were observed for an OT ≥95 min (OR 3.79, 95% CI 1.90–7.57; P < 0.001), positive preoperative urine culture (OR 2.40, 95% CI 1.30–4.42; P = 0.005), and non‐papillary puncture (OR 3.35, 95% CI 1.56–7.19; P = 0.001). Compared with OT analysed as single parameter, the multivariable models provided better discrimination, with AUCs of 0.70, 0.73, and 0.77 for overall, major, and infectious complications, respectively (Fig. S2).
Table 2.
Multivariable logistic regression analysis for overall, major, and infectious complications using OT categorised at the 95‐min threshold.
| OR (95% CI) | P | |
|---|---|---|
| Overall complications | ||
| OT ≥95 min (<95 min as reference) | 3.37 (2.16–5.26) | <0.001 |
| Age (per 1 year increase) | 1.04 (0.99–1.09) | 0.053 |
| Single largest stone diameter (per 10 mm increase) | 0.99 (0.80–1.22) | 0.948 |
| Preoperative JJ/nephrostomy stent, yes (no as reference) | 1.38 (0.90–2.11) | 0.130 |
| Multiple stones, yes (no as reference) | 0.74 (0.44–1.25) | 0.376 |
| Staghorn stone, yes (no as reference) | 1.08 (0.60–1.95) | 0.475 |
| Tract size, mini‐PCNL (standard‐PCNL as reference) | 0.93 (0.56–1.55) | 0.949 |
| Puncture site, non‐papillary (papillary as reference) | 2.14 (1.19–3.85) | 0.018 |
| Fragmentation device, pneumatic/ultrasonic (laser as reference) | 1.47 (0.89–2.44) | 0.155 |
| Major complications | ||
| OT ≥95 min (<95 min as reference) | 2.63 (1.35–5.10) | 0.004 |
| Sex, male (female as reference) | 2.21 (1.16–4.21) | 0.015 |
| Staghorn stone, yes (no as reference) | 1.36 (0.72–2.60) | 0.336 |
| Puncture site, non‐papillary (papillary as reference) | 2.76 (1.30–5.86) | 0.008 |
| ECIRS, yes (no as reference) | 1.45 (0.78–2.67) | 0.230 |
| Fragmentation device, pneumatic/ultrasonic (laser as reference) | 1.49 (0.81–2.74) | 0.195 |
| Infectious complications | ||
| OT ≥95 min (<95 min as reference) | 3.79 (1.90–7.57) | <0.001 |
| Single largest stone diameter (per 10 mm increase) | 1.05 (0.80–1.39) | 0.702 |
| Preoperative urine culture, positive (negative as reference) | 2.40 (1.30–4.42) | 0.005 |
| Multiple stones, yes (no as reference) | 0.64 (0.29–1.40) | 0.266 |
| Staghorn stone, yes (no as reference) | 1.10 (0.48–2.54) | 0.808 |
| Puncture site, non‐papillary (papillary as reference) | 3.35 (1.56–7.19) | 0.001 |
Statistically significant results are presented in bold.
In supplementary multivariable logistic regression analyses with OT entered as a continuous variable, OT was significantly associated with overall complications, but not with major or infectious complications (Table S5).
Adjusted restricted cubic spline analyses showed significant associations between OT and overall complications (overall P < 0.001), major complications (overall P = 0.029), and infectious complications (overall P < 0.001). For each outcome, the association was non‐linear (P for non‐linearity <0.05). The spline curves (Fig. 2A,C,E) indicated that the adjusted probability of complications increased with longer OT, with a steeper rise beyond approximately 90–100 min. Using 95 min as the reference value, the spline‐based OR curves (Fig. 2B,D,E) showed a consistent directional pattern across all outcomes, remaining below 1 at OTs shorter than 95 min and above 1 at longer OTs. All other covariates identified as significant in the corresponding multivariable logistic regression models remained significant in the spline‐adjusted analyses.
Fig. 2.

Adjusted restricted cubic spline curves for the association between OT and postoperative complications. Solid lines represent spline‐based estimates, shaded areas indicate 95% CIs, and the red dashed line marks the 95‐min OT threshold. (A) Adjusted predicted probability of overall complications. (B) Adjusted odds ratio for overall complications, using 95 min as the reference operative time. (C) Adjusted predicted probability of major complications. (D) Adjusted OR for major complications, using 95 min as the reference OT. (E) Adjusted predicted probability of infectious complications. (F) Adjusted OR for infectious complications, using 95 min as the reference OT.
Discussion
In this international multicentre cohort of elderly patients undergoing PCNL, OT emerged as a clinically relevant procedural factor associated with postoperative morbidity. Longer procedures were associated with higher odds of overall, major, and infectious complications, and a threshold around 95 min appeared to differentiate lower‐ from higher‐risk cases. The relatively high NPV of this cut‐off suggests that procedures completed within this time frame were generally associated with a low likelihood of postoperative complications.
As OT is defined inconsistently across the PCNL literature, ranging from puncture‐based measures limited to the percutaneous phase, through definitions extending to nephrostomy placement or skin closure, to broader measures that also include retrograde steps or even total operating‐room time [9, 10, 11]. In the present study, OT was recorded as the interval from renal puncture to completion of the procedure according to the selected exit strategy. Although this differs from broader definitions that also include preoperative or non‐surgical procedural components, it more specifically captures the active surgical phase of the PCNL and reduces the influence of non‐operative time elements that are less directly related to procedural complexity and postoperative outcomes.
In our cohort, OT showed the strongest independent association with infectious complications. In multivariable analysis, OT ≥95 min was associated with nearly fourfold higher odds of infectious events (OR 3.79). This finding was further supported by the highest discriminative performance of the final multivariable model (AUC 0.77). When analysed as an isolated predictor, OT also achieved its best ROC performance for this endpoint (AUC 0.65), with 71.4% sensitivity, 60.9% specificity, and a NPV of 96.7%. Notably, the threshold we identified converges closely with independent estimates derived in unrelated cohorts. In a single‐centre series of 802 patients with complex renal calculi, an operating time ≥100 min emerged as an independent predictor of post‐PCNL sepsis (OR 4.4) alongside positive stone culture [12]. Similarly, a recent sex‐stratified analysis identified an OT threshold of 96 min for infectious complications in women, although a considerably longer threshold of 137 min in men [13]. The consistency of these independently derived cut‐offs in the 95–100 min range, despite differing populations, endpoints and analytical approaches, lends external support to the threshold observed in our elderly cohort.
A plausible explanation is that longer PCNL may increase cumulative exposure to sustained renal pelvic pressure, pyelovenous backflow, and irrigation‐fluid absorption, thereby facilitating the systemic translocation of bacteria and endotoxins released during stone manipulation [14, 15]. In turn, these inflammatory triggers may accumulate in a threshold‐dependent manner, which could help explain the observed non‐linear relationship between OT and infectious complications. Support for this interpretation comes from the recent paediatric study by Abudurexiti et al. [2]. Notably, this is one of the very few PCNL studies to specifically evaluate non‐linearity and threshold effects. Using restricted cubic spline and two‐piecewise regression analyses, the authors showed a non‐linear association between OT and post‐PCNL systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) with an inflection point at 70 min [2]. Our findings are broadly consistent with these results, as our spline regression analysis confirmed that the effect of OT was not purely linear, with a steeper increase in the adjusted probability of infectious complications beyond approximately 90–100 min.
It has to be emphasised that intraoperative stone cultures and renal pelvic urine cultures were not systematically obtained across the participating centres. Stone composition analysis was available in 286 patients (39.9%; Table S6); however, because analytical methods and reporting practices were not standardised across centres and data were unavailable for most of the cohort, stone composition was assessed descriptively and was not included in the multivariable analyses. Although a positive preoperative bladder urine culture was independently associated with infectious complications in our cohort, bladder urine provides an incomplete representation of the upper‐tract microbiological environment. Prospective studies have demonstrated that stone and renal pelvic urine cultures more accurately identify the organisms associated with post‐PCNL infectious complications, while discordance between preoperative bladder urine and stone cultures is common [16, 17]. These findings have subsequently been confirmed in systematic reviews and meta‐analyses showing that stone culture is more informative than preoperative midstream urine culture for predicting postoperative sepsis [18]. Current EAU Guidelines therefore strongly recommend obtaining a stone culture or urine culture directly from the renal pelvis at the time of PCNL whenever feasible [1]. The absence of these data prevented us from assessing culture discordance and from determining whether the association between prolonged OT and infectious complications was mediated by an increased intraoperative microbial burden; therefore, this proposed mechanism remains inferential rather than directly demonstrated in our cohort.
Importantly, perioperative antibiotic protocols were not standardised across participating centres. Among patients with a positive preoperative urine culture, the median duration of antibiotic therapy was 2 days and did not differ significantly according to the occurrence of overall complications (median [IQR] 2 [1–3] vs 2 [1–4] days; P = 0.438), major complications (median [IQR] 2 [1–3] vs 2 [1–4] days; P = 0.517), or infectious complications (median [IQR] 2 [1–3] vs 2 [2–4] days; P = 0.184). This suggests that differences in treatment duration alone are unlikely to fully explain the observed variation in postoperative infectious outcomes, although residual confounding related to antibiotic selection, timing, susceptibility‐guided therapy, and centre‐specific protocols cannot be excluded. Current evidence indicates that extended preoperative therapy may be beneficial mainly in higher‐risk patients, but findings remain inconsistent. The 7‐day regimens have been associated with lower rates of SIRS or sepsis in some trials and meta‐analyses, particularly in patients with positive urine cultures or indwelling drainage, whereas other randomised studies found no advantage over shorter treatment [19, 20, 21, 22]. Therefore, inter‐centre variation in perioperative antibiotic management may still have contributed to residual heterogeneity in infectious outcomes.
We also found that an OT ≥95 min was associated with slightly weaker, yet still consistent, increases in the odds of overall (OR 3.37) and major (OR 2.63) complications. This may partly reflect cumulative renal parenchymal and vascular trauma during PCNL. Our ‘safe’ threshold appears less conservative than that reported by Pakdel et al. [3], who found associations between longer OT and overall and major complications (but not SIRS) and suggested lower cut‐offs of 65 and 55 min, respectively. In contrast, Liu et al. [23], in an elderly cohort, found that an OT >60 min was not independently associated with postoperative complications Thus, based on our findings, excessively conservative OT thresholds do not necessarily need to be applied even in a more vulnerable geriatric population; however, the acceptable procedure duration should always be individualised according to the patient's clinical condition, frailty status, comorbidity burden, and overall operative complexity.
We also identified non‐papillary puncture as additional risk factor for all types of analysed complications. Although non‐papillary access is often considered safe in the general PCNL literature [24], our findings suggest that in elderly patients it may be associated with less favourable outcomes, possibly due to lower physiological reserve and greater susceptibility to parenchymal trauma. In addition, positive preoperative urine culture remained associated with a higher risk of postoperative infectious complications, underscoring the importance of careful preoperative microbiological assessment and management in this population.
The OT obviously reflects stone and procedural complexity, which was also evident in our cohort (Table S3). Cases with an OT ≥95 min were characterised by greater stone volume and higher prevalence of staghorn calculi, which is consistent with previous literature [25]. However, because OT remained independently associated with postoperative complications after adjustment in our multivariable models, it seems to represent more than a simple surrogate of case complexity. Rather, particularly in higher‐risk populations such as elderly patients, OT may serve as a practical intraoperative warning sign. From a technical perspective, this supports efforts to minimise procedural duration whenever feasible, including appropriate case selection and allocation to experienced surgeons, especially given evidence that OT is prolonged during the learning curve [26]. Likewise, in patients with highly complex stone burden, a staged approach may be worth considering when further attempts at complete clearance are expected to substantially prolong the procedure, as previous studies have shown that staged PCNL can achieve comparable stone‐free outcomes while reducing bleeding and infectious complication rates [27, 28]. However, in elderly patients any potential benefit of limiting prolonged single‐session operative stress must still be balanced against the risks of repeated anaesthesia.
Of note, our complication rates merit comparison with published benchmarks. The overall complication rate of 16.8% was comparable to the 20.5% reported in the prospective Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society (CROES) PCNL Global Study [29], whereas major complications (6.8%) and sepsis (3.1%) exceeded the pooled estimates of 5.2% and 0.6% reported for elderly patients in a recent systematic review and meta‐analysis [30]. This is consistent with the age‐stratified findings of that analysis, in which studies applying a 70‐year threshold (as in the present cohort) demonstrated a significantly higher risk of major complications than those using 60‐ or 65‐year definitions (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.15–3.31) [30]. The transfusion rate of 4.9% fell within the contemporary range of approximately 5–7% and plausibly reflects the predominance of miniaturised access (mini‐PCNL in 64%), supine positioning in most cases, and the exclusively high‐volume nature of the participating centres, all of which have been associated with lower bleeding‐related morbidity [31].
From a practical perspective, the approximately 95‐min threshold should not be interpreted as a rigid stopping rule, but rather as an intraoperative checkpoint prompting reassessment of the balance between further stone clearance and cumulative procedural risk. The decision to continue or stage the procedure should remain individualised and should incorporate residual stone burden, proximity to completion, bleeding and visibility, haemodynamic and anaesthetic stability, microbiological risk, comorbidity, frailty, and the expected duration of additional manoeuvres. Staging may be reasonable when substantial residual treatment remains and further attempts at clearance are expected to prolong the procedure considerably, whereas continuation may be appropriate when completion is imminent and the patient remains stable. Thus, OT should complement, rather than replace, the responsible surgeon's clinical judgement.
The present study has several important strengths. It represents a large international multicentre cohort focused exclusively on patients aged ≥70 years, a population that remains underrepresented in the PCNL literature. Moreover, the association between OT and postoperative morbidity was evaluated across three clinically relevant endpoints using complementary analytical approaches, including multivariable regression, bootstrap assessment of threshold stability, and restricted cubic spline modelling. Several limitations should nevertheless be acknowledged. First, the retrospective design introduces the possibility of selection bias, incomplete data capture, and residual confounding. Second, perioperative management, surgical technique, antimicrobial protocols, and reporting practices were not fully standardised across centres. Unmeasured centre‐level effects may therefore persist, while the inclusion of exclusively high‐volume institutions may limit generalisability to lower‐volume or less specialised settings. Third, patients with urinary tract abnormalities were excluded during local data collection, but the number of excluded patients was not recorded centrally. The findings should therefore not be extrapolated to patients with neurogenic bladder, urinary diversion, or congenital renal anomalies. Fourth, intraoperative stone and renal pelvic urine cultures were not systematically obtained, preventing assessment of their concordance with preoperative bladder urine cultures and limiting evaluation of the microbiological mechanisms underlying infectious complications. Perioperative antibiotic regimens were also not standardised, and differences in antibiotic selection, susceptibility‐guided treatment, and timing may have contributed to heterogeneity in infectious outcomes. Fifth, relevant perioperative laboratory variables, including pre‐ and postoperative haemoglobin levels and renal function parameters such as estimated GFR, were not uniformly available. Consequently, we could not evaluate baseline anaemia, perioperative haemoglobin decline, renal function changes, or their contribution to transfusion requirements and postoperative outcomes. Finally, data on individual operator experience and trainee involvement were not captured. As OT may be influenced by surgeon volume and position on the learning curve, residual confounding by operator experience cannot be excluded, despite all procedures being performed at experienced high‐volume institutions.
Conclusions
In elderly patients undergoing PCNL, prolonged OT was independently associated with a higher risk of overall, major, and infectious postoperative complications. Our findings further suggest that this relationship is not simply linear, but follows a non‐linear pattern with a clinically relevant threshold effect around 95 min and a more pronounced increase in risk beyond approximately 90–100 min. As OT is one of the few potentially modifiable procedural factors, these results may have practical implications for intraoperative decision‐making and risk stratification. Although the retrospective multicentre design warrants cautious interpretation, this study provides robust international evidence supporting OT as a meaningful marker of postoperative risk in elderly patients undergoing PCNL.
Author Contributions
The authors listed below have made substantial contributions to the intellectual content of the paper in the various sections described. Conceptualisation: Łukasz Nowak, Bhaskar Somani, Begoña Ballesta Martinez. Methodology: Łukasz Nowak, Bhaskar Somani, Begoña Ballesta Martinez. Software: Łukasz Nowak. Validation: Łukasz Nowak, Bhaskar Somani, Begoña Ballesta Martinez. Formal analysis: Łukasz Nowak. Investigation: Łukasz Nowak, Bhaskar Somani, Wojciech Krajewski, Tomasz Szydełko, Vineet Gauhar, Steffi Kar Kei Yuen, Matthias Boeykens, Thomas Tailly, Ioannis Mykoniatis, Alba Sierra, Emre T. Sener, Vincent De Coninck, Rifat Burak Ergul, Alberto Olivero, Lazaros Tzelves, Francesco Esperto, Angelis Peteinaris, Yuigi Yuminaga, Qi Hou, Patrick Juliebø‐Jones, Arman Tsaturyan, Bartosz Małkiewicz, Agata Góral, Paulina Biesiadecka, Francisco Javier Lopez Vivo, Mantu Gupta, Juan Serna, Ziv Savin, Anastasios Anastasiadis, Dimitrios Memmos, Charlotte Slots, Rita Pages, Ceyhun Ozdemiroglu, Maria Florencia Frascheri, Rafael Carrasco Moreno, Eugenio Ventimiglia, Panagiotis Kallidonis, Evangelos Liatsikos, Otas Durutovic, Amelia Pietropaolo, Begoña Ballesta Martinez. Resources: Łukasz Nowak, Bhaskar Somani, Wojciech Krajewski, Tomasz Szydełko, Vineet Gauhar, Steffi Kar Kei Yuen, Matthias Boeykens, Thomas Tailly, Ioannis Mykoniatis, Alba Sierra, Emre T. Sener, Vincent De Coninck, Rifat Burak Ergul, Alberto Olivero, Lazaros Tzelves, Francesco Esperto, Angelis Peteinaris, Yuigi Yuminaga, Qi Hou, Patrick Juliebø‐Jones, Arman Tsaturyan, Bartosz Małkiewicz, Agata Góral, Paulina Biesiadecka, Francisco Javier Lopez Vivo, Mantu Gupta, Juan Serna, Ziv Savin, Anastasios Anastasiadis, Dimitrios Memmos, Charlotte Slots, Rita Pages, Ceyhun Ozdemiroglu, Maria Florencia Frascheri, Rafael Carrasco Moreno, Eugenio Ventimiglia, Panagiotis Kallidonis, Evangelos Liatsikos, Otas Durutovic, Amelia Pietropaolo, Begoña Ballesta Martinez. Data Curation: Łukasz Nowak, Begoña Ballesta Martinez. Writing – Original Draft: Łukasz Nowak, Begoña Ballesta Martinez. Writing – Review and Editing: Łukasz Nowak, Bhaskar Somani, Wojciech Krajewski, Tomasz Szydełko, Vineet Gauhar, Steffi Kar Kei Yuen, Matthias Boeykens, Thomas Tailly, Ioannis Mykoniatis, Alba Sierra, Emre T. Sener, Vincent De Coninck, Rifat Burak Ergul, Alberto Olivero, Lazaros Tzelves, Francesco Esperto, Angelis Peteinaris, Yuigi Yuminaga, Qi Hou, Patrick Juliebø‐Jones, Arman Tsaturyan, Bartosz Małkiewicz, Agata Góral, Paulina Biesiadecka, Francisco Javier Lopez Vivo, Mantu Gupta, Juan Serna, Ziv Savin, Anastasios Anastasiadis, Dimitrios Memmos, Charlotte Slots, Rita Pages, Ceyhun Ozdemiroglu, Maria Florencia Frascheri, Rafael Carrasco Moreno, Eugenio Ventimiglia, Panagiotis Kallidonis, Evangelos Liatsikos, Otas Durutovic, Amelia Pietropaolo, Begoña Ballesta Martinez. Visualisation: Łukasz Nowak, Begoña Ballesta Martinez. Supervision: Wojciech Krajewski, Bhaskar Somani. Project administration: Łukasz Nowak, Begoña Ballesta Martinez. Funding acquisition: Not applicable.
Disclosure of Interests
None declared.
Funding
None.
Ethics Approval
Ethical or institutional approval was obtained according to local regulations at each participating centre.
Clinical Trial Number
Not applicable.
Consent for Publication
Not applicable.
Supporting information
Fig. S1A. Bootstrap validation of the ROC‐derived OT cut‐off for overall complications. The figure shows the distribution of OT by complication status, the ROC curve, the bootstrap distribution of optimal cut‐off values, and out‐of‐bag Youden index estimates. Although bootstrap‐derived cut‐offs were not identical across re‐samples, most clustered around the mid‐90‐min range, supporting the use of an operative time threshold close to 95 min.
Fig. S1B. Bootstrap validation of the ROC‐derived OT cut‐off for major complications. The figure shows the distribution of operative time by complication status, the ROC curve, the bootstrap distribution of optimal cut‐off values, and out‐of‐bag Youden index estimates. Although bootstrap‐derived cut‐offs were not identical across re‐samples, most clustered around the mid‐90‐min range, supporting the use of an operative time threshold close to 95 min.
Fig. S1C. Bootstrap validation of the ROC‐derived OT cut‐off for infectious complications. The figure shows the distribution of operative time by complication status, the ROC curve, the bootstrap distribution of optimal cut‐off values, and out‐of‐bag Youden index estimates. Although bootstrap‐derived cut‐offs were not identical across re‐samples, most clustered around the mid‐90‐min range, supporting the use of an operative time threshold close to 95 min.
Fig. S2. The ROC curves of the final multivariable logistic regression models for overall, major, and infectious complications. Panel (A) shows the ROC curve for the model predicting overall complications, panel (B) for major complications, and panel (C) for infectious complications. Corresponding AUC values with 95% CIs are shown in each panel.
Table S1. Detailed distribution of postoperative complications according to the modified Clavien–Dindo classification system validated for PCNL.
Table S2. The ROC analysis of OT for overall, major, and infectious complications.
Table S3. Comparison of baseline demographic, stone‐related, and perioperative characteristics according to the OT <95‐ vs ≥95‐min groups.
Table S4. Univariable logistic regression analysis for overall, major, and infectious complications. Variables with P ≤ 0.10, considered eligible for further selection into multivariable analyses, are highlighted in bold.
Table S5. Multivariable logistic regression analysis for overall, major, and infectious complications with OT entered as a continuous variable.
Table S6. Distribution of stone composition among patients with available stone analysis.
Acknowledgements
None.
Data Availability Statement
The data and the full statistical code are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
- 1. Skolarikos A, Geraghty R, Somani B et al. European Association of Urology guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of urolithiasis. Eur Urol 2025; 88: 64–75 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Abudurexiti N, Li X, Liu B, Wang S, Dong Q. Saturation effect between operation time and post‐PCNL SIRS in pediatric patients. World J Urol 2025; 43: 1–10 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Pakdel A, Mohammadi A, Shamshirgaran A et al. Operation time as a prognostic indicator on postoperative complications following percutaneous nephrolithotomy. SAGE Open Med 2025; 13: 20503121251318902 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Eredics K, Drerup M, Özsoy M et al. Active stone removal is a safe option for ocotogenarians and nonagenarians with nephrolithiasis. World J Urol 2023; 41: 849–856 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Schulz AE, Green BW, Gupta K et al. Management of large kidney stones in the geriatric population. World J Urol 2023; 41: 981–992 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Danilovic A, Perrone G, Dias L et al. Is it worth using the comprehensive complication index over the Clavien‐Dindo classification in elderly patients who underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy? World J Urol 2024; 42: 599 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. GBD 2019 Ageing Collaborators . Global, regional, and national burden of diseases and injuries for adults 70 years and older: systematic analysis for the global burden of disease 2019 study. BMJ 2022; 376: e068208 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. de la Rosette JJ, Opondo D, Daels FP et al. Categorisation of complications and validation of the Clavien score for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 246–255 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Dou Q, Qin Z, Liu J, Li R, Jia R. Endoscopic dilation using two guidewires: a novel approach for establishing access tract during percutaneous nephrolithotomy under ultrasonographic guidance. J Int Med Res 2023; 51: 3000605231213228 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Lan S, Liu B, Xie S, Yang C. Risk factors of systemic inflammatory response syndrome after minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy with a controlled irrigation pressure. BMC Urol 2024; 24: 287 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Lim KY, Liew AN, Ling Z, Ranasinghe W, McCahy P. Modified supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the elderly: outcomes and safety. J Clin Med 2023; 12: 4807 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Chen D, Jiang C, Liang X et al. Early and rapid prediction of postoperative infections following percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with complex kidney stones. BJU Int 2019; 123: 1041–1047 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Passarelli F, Basadonna LM, Ciamarra F et al. A gender‐based investigation of risk factors for infectious complications after percutaneous nephrolithotomy for kidney stones: insight for personalized management. World J Urol 2026; 44: 184 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Zhou G, Zhou Y, Chen R et al. The influencing factors of infectious complications after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Urolithiasis 2022; 51: 17 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Zhang T, Zhu L, Wang X et al. Machine learning models to predict systemic inflammatory response syndrome after percutaneous nephrolithotomy. BMC Urol 2024; 24: 140 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Mariappan P, Smith G, Bariol SV, Moussa SA, Tolley DA. Stone and pelvic urine culture and sensitivity are better than bladder urine as predictors of urosepsis following percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a prospective clinical study. J Urol 2005; 173: 1610–1614 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Paonessa JE, Gnessin E, Bhojani N, Williams JC Jr, Lingeman JE. Preoperative bladder urine culture as a predictor of intraoperative stone culture results: clinical implications and relationship to stone composition. J Urol 2016; 196: 769–774 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Ripa F, Cerrato C, Tandogdu Z et al. Clinical significance of stone culture during endourological procedures in predicting post‐operative urinary sepsis: should it be a standard of care‐evidence from a systematic review and meta‐analysis from EAU section of urolithiasis (EULIS). World J Urol 2024; 42: 614 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Danilovic A, Talizin TB, Torricelli FCM et al. One week pre‐operative oral antibiotics for percutaneous nephrolithotomy reduce risk of infection: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Int Braz J Urol 2023; 49: 184–193 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Patel H, Shekar PA, Reddy D, Dumra A, Shivakumar KS. A randomised controlled trial comparing two protocols of preoperative antibiotics in patients with positive urine culture undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy. World J Urol 2023; 41: 2225–2232 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Sur RL, Krambeck AE, Large T et al. A randomized controlled trial of preoperative prophylactic antibiotics for percutaneous nephrolithotomy in moderate to high infectious risk population: a report from the EDGE consortium. J Urol 2021; 205: 1379–1386 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Xu P, Zhang S, Zhang Y et al. Preoperative antibiotic therapy exceeding 7 days can minimize infectious complications after percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with positive urine culture. World J Urol 2022; 40: 193–199 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Liu J, Gu J, Xu W et al. Efficacy and safety of percutaneous nephrolithotripsy in elderly patients: a retrospective study. BMC Surg 2022; 22: 392 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Kallidonis P, Peteinaris A, Tatanis V, Vagionis A, Faitatziadis S, Liatsikos E. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy non‐papillary puncture trends. A review of the literature. Actas Urol Esp (Engl Ed) 2024; 48: 52–56 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Akman T, Binbay M, Akcay M et al. Variables that influence operative time during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: An analysis of 1897 cases. J Endourol 2011; 25: 1269–1273 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Wirtzfeld N, Keller EX, Kwok JL et al. Systematic review on the learning curve of percutaneous nephrolithotomy: operative time, fluoroscopy time, stone‐free rate, puncture performance, complications, and safety indicators. Urology 2025; 205: 271–289 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Wu J, He S, Wang H, Zhou G, Qiu X. Efficacy and economy of two‐stage percutaneous nephrolithotomy for complex renal calculi. Arch Esp Urol 2022; 75: 862–866 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Zhao Z, Cui Z, Zeng T, Wan SP, Zeng G. Comparison of 1‐stage with 2‐stage multiple‐tracts mini‐percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the treatment of staghorn stones: a matched cohorts analysis. Urology 2016; 87: 46–51 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. de la Rosette J, Assimos D, Desai M et al. The Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Global Study: indications, complications, and outcomes in 5803 patients. J Endourol 2011; 25: 11–17 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Nowak L, Martinez BB, Krajewski W et al. Safety and efficacy of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in elderly patients: a systematic review and meta‐analysis by the EAU‐YAU urolithiasis and EAU endourology sections. World J Urol 2026; 44: 344 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Wan C, Wang D, Xiang J et al. Comparison of postoperative outcomes of mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta‐analysis. Urolithiasis 2022; 50: 523–533 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Fig. S1A. Bootstrap validation of the ROC‐derived OT cut‐off for overall complications. The figure shows the distribution of OT by complication status, the ROC curve, the bootstrap distribution of optimal cut‐off values, and out‐of‐bag Youden index estimates. Although bootstrap‐derived cut‐offs were not identical across re‐samples, most clustered around the mid‐90‐min range, supporting the use of an operative time threshold close to 95 min.
Fig. S1B. Bootstrap validation of the ROC‐derived OT cut‐off for major complications. The figure shows the distribution of operative time by complication status, the ROC curve, the bootstrap distribution of optimal cut‐off values, and out‐of‐bag Youden index estimates. Although bootstrap‐derived cut‐offs were not identical across re‐samples, most clustered around the mid‐90‐min range, supporting the use of an operative time threshold close to 95 min.
Fig. S1C. Bootstrap validation of the ROC‐derived OT cut‐off for infectious complications. The figure shows the distribution of operative time by complication status, the ROC curve, the bootstrap distribution of optimal cut‐off values, and out‐of‐bag Youden index estimates. Although bootstrap‐derived cut‐offs were not identical across re‐samples, most clustered around the mid‐90‐min range, supporting the use of an operative time threshold close to 95 min.
Fig. S2. The ROC curves of the final multivariable logistic regression models for overall, major, and infectious complications. Panel (A) shows the ROC curve for the model predicting overall complications, panel (B) for major complications, and panel (C) for infectious complications. Corresponding AUC values with 95% CIs are shown in each panel.
Table S1. Detailed distribution of postoperative complications according to the modified Clavien–Dindo classification system validated for PCNL.
Table S2. The ROC analysis of OT for overall, major, and infectious complications.
Table S3. Comparison of baseline demographic, stone‐related, and perioperative characteristics according to the OT <95‐ vs ≥95‐min groups.
Table S4. Univariable logistic regression analysis for overall, major, and infectious complications. Variables with P ≤ 0.10, considered eligible for further selection into multivariable analyses, are highlighted in bold.
Table S5. Multivariable logistic regression analysis for overall, major, and infectious complications with OT entered as a continuous variable.
Table S6. Distribution of stone composition among patients with available stone analysis.
Data Availability Statement
The data and the full statistical code are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
