Suction Mini-PCNL Versus Standard PCNL for the Management of 2-4cm Kidney Stones
NCT05088213 · Status: UNKNOWN · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 960
Last updated 2021-10-21
Summary
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) was the first line choice for the management of renal calculi larger than 20 mm. A relative large tract of 24-30Fr was widely used in standard PCNL (sPCNL), which was believed to bring tract-related bleeding. In order to reduce the risk of tract-related bleeding, Chinese urologists used 18Fr mini-tract in the PCNL procedures, which was well known as minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL). In an international multi-centre randomized controlled trail (RCT) , mini-PCNL and sPCNL was compared in the management of 2-4cm kidney stones, the stone free rate (SFR) in mini-PCNL was equal to that of sPCNL. However, since the tract was smaller, the postoperative pain in mini-PCNL was less, the postoperative recovery was faster, and the hospital stay was shorter. Recently, professor Guohua Zeng developed enhanced super-mini-PCNL (eSMP) technique. When compared to traditional mini-PCNL, suction mini-PCNL using 18Fr suction sheath increased the stone removal efficiency and reduced the renal pelvic pressure. While in the present regard, whether suction mini-PCNL play an more efficent and safe role in the management of 2-4cm kidney stones was worthy of further study.
So, the investigators would like to have an international multi-centre RCT to certify our hypothesis.
Conditions
- Kidney Calculi
Interventions
- PROCEDURE
-
suction mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy
18Fr suction sheath (Weili, China) was inserted, and 12Fr mini-nephroscope was used, kidney stones was fragmented by pneumatic lithotriptor (LithoClast Master, Switzerland) or Ho:YAG laser(0.8-1.0W\*20-30Hz), and stone fragments was sucked out with the suction sheath.
- PROCEDURE
-
standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy
24-30Fr sheath was inserted, and 20Fr nephroscope (Richard Wolf, Germany) was used, kidney stones was disintegrated and sucked out by ultrasonic-lithotripter (LithoClast Master, EMS, Switzerland or ShockPluse-SE, Olympus).
Sponsors & Collaborators
-
Aceves of Wake Forest University Medical Center
collaborator UNKNOWN -
University College London Hospital
collaborator UNKNOWN -
San Paolo Hospital, University of Milan
collaborator UNKNOWN -
Örebro University, Sweden
collaborator OTHER -
San Bassiano Hospital, Vicenza, Italy
collaborator UNKNOWN -
ALAMIRI Hospital, SABAH ALAHMAD Urology Center, Kuwait
collaborator UNKNOWN -
Biruni University Medical School, İstanbul, Turkey
collaborator UNKNOWN -
Jose R. Reyes Memorial Medical Center, Manila, Philippines.
collaborator UNKNOWN -
Military Medical Academy, Bulgaria
collaborator OTHER -
The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University
collaborator OTHER -
First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University
collaborator OTHER -
Zunyi Medical College
collaborator OTHER -
The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University
collaborator OTHER -
Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University
collaborator OTHER -
Wuhan University
collaborator OTHER -
The Jiangxi Provincial People's Hospital
collaborator UNKNOWN -
Affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University
collaborator OTHER -
ZhuHai Hospital
collaborator OTHER -
People's Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region
collaborator OTHER -
Xiangtan Central Hospital
collaborator OTHER -
First People's Hospital of Foshan
collaborator OTHER -
The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University
lead OTHER
Principal Investigators
-
Guohua Zeng, Ph.D & MD · The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University
Study Design
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Masking
- NONE
- Model
- PARALLEL
Eligibility
- Min Age
- 18 Years
- Max Age
- 70 Years
- Sex
- ALL
- Healthy Volunteers
- No
Timeline & Regulatory
- Start
- 2021-12-01
- Primary Completion
- 2023-04-01
- Completion
- 2023-12-01
Countries
- China
Study Locations
More Related Trials
-
Comparison of Total Tubeless Mini-PCNL Versus Tubeless Mini-PCNL
NCT06288022 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison of the Efficacy of Flexible Ureteroscope and Percutaneous Nephroscopic Surgery in the Treatment of 2-4cm Kidney Stones
NCT06507176 ·Status: TERMINATED ·Phase: NA
-
Ho:YAG Laser Versus Thulium Laser for the Management of 2-4cm Kidney Stones During SMP
NCT05190536 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
RIRS With Flex Suction Sheath vs. PCNL for 2-3 cm Renal Stones
NCT07058402 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
SMP vs RIRS for Symptomatic Lower Pole Renal Calculi of 10-20 mm Size: a Randomized Controlled Trial
NCT02519634 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Flexible Ureteroscopy With a Flexible and Navigable Suction Ureteral Access Sheath Versus Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for 1-2 cm Lower Pole Kidney Stones
NCT07159035 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
The Influence of SMP on Renal Pelvic Pressure In Vivo
NCT02760134 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Steerable vs Conventional FANS for <2cm Lower Pole Stone Treatment: SCULPT Trial
NCT06898216 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
The Feasibility, Safety, and Efficacy of Not Indwelling of Ureteral Stents in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
NCT06455618 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Randomized Controlled Trial of Miniaturized Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy With Vacuum-Assisted Access Sheaths Versus Conventional Sheaths for Treatment of Nephrolithiasis
NCT05993546 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Standard vs Mini-PCNL for the Treatment of Stone Disease
NCT04069013 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
A Prospective Comparison of Fluoroscopic, Sonographic or Combined Approach for Renal Access in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
NCT02266381 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Retrograde Ureteral Catheterization Is Not Essential in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial
NCT06750913 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Ultra-Mini Versus Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy For Management Of Renal Calculi. A Randomized Controlled Trial.
NCT04764071 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: PHASE3
-
Mini-PNL, RIRS, and ESWL for Treatment of Medium-Sized, High-Density, Non-Lower Pole, Renal Stones
NCT04856722 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison Between Two Methods for Renal Stone Treatment Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and Flexible Ureteroscopy With Suction Sheath
NCT07306819 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Sheathless, Traditional, and Suction Access Sheath RIRS for Renal Stones ≤2 cm
NCT07289230 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
New Laser and Suction Sheath for Kidney Stone Treatment
NCT06667466 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING
-
Tip Bendable Suction Ureteral Access Sheath vs. Traditional Ureteral Access Sheath in Retrograde Intrarenal Stone Surgery
NCT05952635 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Management of Medium Sized Renal Stones
NCT06720311 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Outcomes in Lower Pole Kidney Stone Management Using Mini-PCNL Compared With Retrograde Intra Renal Surgery
NCT05714423 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Safety and Efficacy of Traditional Versus Flexible and Navigable Suction Sheath in Retrograde Intra-Renal Stone Surgery
NCT07286071 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Tubeless vs Tube PCNL in Pediatric Nephrolithiasis: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
NCT07183930 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Disposable Versus Disposable Nephroscope During PCNLs: a Feasibility RCT
NCT06579924 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Mini-PNCL vs fURS in Management of Nephrolithiasis
NCT04389853 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA