Super-Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Versus Flexible Ureteroscopy for Renal Stones ≤20 mm: A Randomized Controlled Trial
NCT07371494 · Status: COMPLETED · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 72
Last updated 2026-01-28
Summary
Kidney stones measuring 20 mm or less are commonly managed using minimally invasive surgical techniques. Two widely used approaches are Super-mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (SMP) and Flexible Ureteroscopy (fURS). Although both techniques are considered effective and safe, they differ in surgical approach, use of disposable equipment, postoperative recovery, and treatment cost. In resource-limited settings, economic considerations may play an important role in treatment selection.
This single-center randomized controlled trial was conducted at Bach Mai Hospital, Hanoi, Vietnam, to compare clinical outcomes, safety, and direct medical costs of SMP versus fURS in patients with renal stones ≤20 mm. Eligible patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to undergo either SMP or fURS.
The primary outcome was the stone-free rate assessed by postoperative imaging. Secondary outcomes included operative time, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, hemoglobin drop, and total direct treatment cost per case. The results of this study aim to provide evidence to support clinical decision-making for the management of renal stones, particularly in healthcare settings with limited resources.
Conditions
- Renal Calculi (Kidney Stones) ≤ 20 mm
Interventions
- PROCEDURE
-
Super-mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
Surgical removal of renal stones using super-mini PCNL technique
- PROCEDURE
-
Flexible Ureteroscopy
Endoscopic treatment of renal stones using flexible ureteroscope
Sponsors & Collaborators
-
Hanoi Medical 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
- 2024-01-01
- Primary Completion
- 2024-12-31
- Completion
- 2024-12-31
Countries
- Vietnam
Study Locations
More Related Trials
-
Flexible Ureteroscopy Versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy
NCT07193940 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Flexible Ureteroscopy With Tip-bendable Suction Ureteral Access Sheath Versus Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Treatment of 2-3cm Renal Stones
NCT06526390 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Mini-PCNL Versus Standard-PCNL For The Management of 20-40 mm Size Kidney Stones
NCT02635048 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Sheathless, Traditional, and Suction Access Sheath RIRS for Renal Stones ≤2 cm
NCT07289230 ·Status: COMPLETED ·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
-
ESWL Vs Flexible Uretroscopy in Management of Upper Ureteric Stones a Prospective Randomized Study
NCT06722703 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Under Direct Vision vs Under Non Direct Vision of Insertion of UAS in RIRS
NCT03717285 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Efficacy And Safety Of Antegrade Uretroscopic Lithotripsy Versus Retrograde Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy In The Treatment Of Upper Ureteric Stones Measuring > 10 mm In Maximum Dimension. A Randomized Comparative Study
NCT07362784 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Optimal Drainage After Flexible Ureterorenoscopy; Prospective Assessment of Perioperative Outcomes and Health-Related Quality of Life Through a Randomized Controlled Trial
NCT04643145 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Semi-rigid Ureteroscopy Versus Flexible Ureteroscopy For the Treatment of Proximal Ureteric Stone
NCT04851171 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Minimally Invasive Techniques for Treating Large Proximal Ureteral Stones
NCT06199518 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Comparing Different Diameter fURSs With Similar RESDs for the Treatment of Upper Urinary Tract Stones
NCT06987760 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Failed Insertion of Ureteral Access Sheath During Flexible Ureterorenoscopy
NCT05911945 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Tip-flexible Semi-rigid Ureterorenoscope Versus Flexible Ureteroscopy in Renal Calculi
NCT02426931 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
A Prospective Comparison of Fluoroscopic, Sonographic or Combined Approach for Renal Access in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
NCT02266381 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Ultra-Mini Versus Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy For Management Of Renal Calculi. A Randomized Controlled Trial.
NCT04764071 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: PHASE3
-
Flexible Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Vs Retrograde Intra-renal Surgery
NCT06249100 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE2/PHASE3
-
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: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery (RIRS) With High-Power Laser and Flexible, Navigable Suction Access Sheath (FANS) vs Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (miniPCNL) for 2-3 cm Renal Stones
NCT07349992 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Mini-PNCL vs fURS in Management of Nephrolithiasis
NCT04389853 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Robotic Flexible Ureteroscopy Versus Standard Flexible Ureteroscopy for Renal Stones
NCT06660914 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
7.5F Versus 9.2F Flexible Ureteroscopy for the Treatment of 1-2cm Renal Calculi on Postoperative Infection
NCT05231577 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·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
-
Standard-PCNL vs Mini-PCNL vs Super-mini PCNL for the Treatment of ≥2 cm Renal Stone
NCT03771365 ·Status: UNKNOWN
-
RIRS With Tip Flexible Pressure-controlling Ureteral Access Sheath Versus Mini PCNLfor Kidney Stones
NCT06209931 ·Status: RECRUITING