Table 2.
Comparative studies between mini-PCNL and standard PCNL
| Mini-PCNL versus Standard-PCNL: comparison | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||||||||||
| Authors | Study design | Number of cases | Stone free rate (%) | Operative time (min) | Hospital stay (days) | Drop in Hb (g/dL) | Blood trans-fusion (%) | Nephrostomy stay (hours) | |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
| Mini | STD | Mini | STD | Mini | STD | Mini | STD | Mini | STD | Mini | STD | Mini | STD | ||
| Cheng et al.[21] | Randomized | 72 | 115 | *72.2 | *75.9 | *134.3 | *118.9 | 7.3 | 7.5 | 0.53 | 0.97 | 1.4 | 10.4 | / | / |
| **92.6 | **91.3 | **89.4 | **77 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| Guler et al.[22] | Randomized | 51 | 46 | 76.5 | 71.7 | 89.2 | 74.7 | 2.0 | 2.8 | 1.35 | 2.07 | 2 | 15.2 | 35.3 | 72 |
|
| |||||||||||||||
| Kandemir et al.[23] | Randomized | 76 | 72 | 75 | 72.2 | 106.9 | 91.2 | 2.7 | 3.2 | 0.7 | 1.4 | 2.6 | 5.6 | 47.8 | 61.8 |
|
| |||||||||||||||
| Zhong et al.[24] | Randomized | 29 | 25 | 82.8 | 56 | 116 | 103 | 9.8 | 7.1 | 3.2 | 3.5 | 3.4 | 12 | / | / |
*
Results for staghorn stones.
**
Results for simple renal pelvis stones.
PCNL: percutaneous nephrolithotomy; Mini: mini-PCNL; STD: standard PCNL