Efficacy and Safety of Flexible Ureteroscopy Versus Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Management of Staghorn Stones
NCT07322471 · Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 138
Last updated 2026-01-09
Summary
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is considered the treatment of choice for management of large renal calculi larger than 2 cm based on the yearly updated European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines. However, PCNL is a challenging procedure which may be associated with several complications ranging from mild complications, such as urinary extravasation, leakage, infection and bleeding requiring transfusion to sever complications, such as sepsis, injury to surrounding organs, persistent hematuria and renal function impairment. The overall complication rate varies based on patient factors and surgical expertise.
Not only serious complications that defer some endourologists from performing PCNL but also such procedure is contraindicated and avoided by surgeons in cases of retrorenal colon, morbidly obese patients, spinal abnormalities and bleeding diathesis. Therefore, retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) or flexible ureteroscopy (FURS) is increasingly recognized as an effective alternative, particularly for patients seeking a minimally invasive approach with a lower risk of complications.
The best practice in dealing with renal stones using FURS can be achieved via preoperative stenting for 2-4 weeks, negative urine culture, ureteral access sheath (UAS) usage and optimizing laser settings. Compared to PCNL, FURS is a less challenging procedure with low learning curve, less invasive and less bleeding. However, the high cost, including laser usage cost, presenting costs and multisession costs, in addition to the high risk of postoperative infection are considered as major drawbacks of FURS.
RIRS is emerging as an effective, safe, minimally invasive alternative to PCNL. Yet, the success of RIRS in comparison to PCNL, especially in a single session, is still questionable and there is no consensus about it.
Conditions
- Renal Stones
Interventions
- PROCEDURE
-
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy
This intervention includes percutaneous nephrolithotomy for lithotripsy of staghorn stone
- PROCEDURE
-
Flexible ureteroscopy
This intervention includes Flexible ureteroscopy for lithotripsy of staghorn stone
Sponsors & Collaborators
-
Menoufia University
lead OTHER
Study Design
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Masking
- NONE
- Model
- PARALLEL
Eligibility
- Min Age
- 18 Years
- Sex
- ALL
- Healthy Volunteers
- No
Timeline & Regulatory
- Start
- 2026-01-01
- Primary Completion
- 2026-06-01
- Completion
- 2026-07-01
Countries
- Egypt
More Related Trials
-
Bendable Suction Ureteral Access Sheath Versus Conventional Ureteral Access Sheath in Management of Renal Stones Using Flexible Ureteroscopy
NCT06862141 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison Between Supine Mini-PCNL and Flexible Ureteroscopy (FURS) for Dense Lower Calyceal Stones (1-2 cm) in School-Age Pediatric Patients
NCT07345234 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Mini- Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Versus Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in the Treatment of Renal Stones.
NCT04153461 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Comparing Efficacy and Complication Between Prone Versus Prone-Flexed Position for Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL)
NCT06624306 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Ultra Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy VS Stented Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Stone Management
NCT05697341 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Flexible Ureteroscopy Versus Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Treatment of Renal Stones
NCT03932370 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
Flexible vs Semi-rigid URS
NCT07247617 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison Between Two Methods for Renal Stone Treatment Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and Flexible Ureteroscopy With Suction Sheath
NCT07306819 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Effectiveness of Single Use Flexible Ureteroscopes in Treatment of Renal Stones
NCT04578795 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Flexible Ureteroscopy Versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy
NCT07193940 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Multitract Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy(PCNL) in Large Renal Stones.
NCT05291702 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Endoscopic Combined Intrarenal Surgery Versus Multi-Tract Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Complex Renal Stones:
NCT05460559 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Prone Flexed Position in Percutanous Nephrolithotomy
NCT04345835 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
A Prospective Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial of Flexible And Navigable Suction Ureteral Access Sheath Combined With Needle Perc for the Treatment of Partial Staghorn Renal Calculi
NCT06914986 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Ultra-Mini Versus Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy For Management Of Renal Calculi. A Randomized Controlled Trial.
NCT04764071 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: PHASE3
-
Treatment of Upper Ureteric Stones
NCT02469766 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: PHASE4
-
Endoscopic Guided PCNL Versus Standard PCNL
NCT04825353 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Unimodal Bilateral Flexible Ureteroscopy.
NCT05591716 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Flexible Ureteroscopy Versus Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy As Primary Treatment in Renal Stones 2-3 Cm
NCT06892626 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Management of Lower Pole Renal Hard Stones ≤2 cm
NCT06120257 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Efficacy and Safety of Narrow Focus (F1) Versus Wide Focus (F3) of Shock Wave Lithotripsy (SWL) for Renal Calculi
NCT04759599 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Mini- Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for High Density Renal Stones
NCT04346134 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Modified Supine vs Prone Position Pnl
NCT05379894 ·Status: RECRUITING
-
Flexible Ureteroscopy Versus ESWL in the Management of Lower Calyceal Stones
NCT02658942 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Comparing Efficiency and Stone-Free Rates Mini PCNL vs Flex URS
NCT07072598 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA