Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Super-, perfect-, ultra-, micro-, mini-, …: does anybody benefit from miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy?

  • Letter to the Editor
  • Published:
World Journal of Urology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Bader MJ, Gratzke C, Seitz M, Sharma R, Stief CG, Desai M (2011) The “all-seeing needle”: initial results of an optical puncture system confirming access in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 59(6):1054–1059. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.03.026

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bozzini G, Verze P, Arcaniolo D, Dal Piaz O, Buffi NM, Guazzoni G, Provenzano M, Osmolorskij B, Sanguedolce F, Montanari E, Macchione N, Pummer K, Mirone V, De Sio M, Taverna G (2017) A prospective randomized comparison among SWL, PCNL and RIRS for lower calyceal stones less than 2 cm: a multicenter experience: a better understanding on the treatment options for lower pole stones. World J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2084-7

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Desai J, Zeng G, Zhao Z et al (2013) A novel technique of ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy: introduction and an initial experience for treatment of upper urinary calculi less than 2 cm. Biomed Res Int 2013:490793

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Huang Z, Fu F, Zhong Z, Zhang L, Xu R, Zhao X (2012) Chinese minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy for intrarenal stones in patients with solitary kidney: a single-center experience. PLoS One 7(7):e40577. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0040577

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Jackman SV, Docimo SG, Cadeddu JA et al (1998) The “mini-perc” technique: a less invasive alternative to percutaneous nephrolithotomy. World J Urol 16:371–374

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Knoll T, Wezel F, Michel MS et al (2010) Do patients benefit from miniaturized tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy? A comparative prospective study. J Endourol 24:1075–1079

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lahme S, Bichler KH, Strohmaier WL et al (2001) Minimally invasive PCNL in patients with renal pelvic and calyceal stones. Eur Urol 40:619

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Li LY, Gao X, Yang M et al (2010) Does a smaller tract in percutaneous nephrolithotomy contribute to less invasiveness? A prospective comparative study. Urology 75:56–61

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mishra S, Sharma R, Garg C, Kurien A, Sabnis R, Desai M (2011) Prospective comparative study of Miniperc and standard PNL for treatment of 1 to 2 cm size renal stone. BJU Int 108(6):896–899; discussion 899–900. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09936.x

  10. Nagele U, Horstmann M, Sievert KD et al (2007) A newly designed amplatz sheath decreases intrapelvic irrigation pressure during mini-percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy: an in vitro pressure-measurement and microscopic study. J Endourol 21:1113–1116

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ruhayel Y, Tepeler A, Dabestani S, MacLennan S, Petřík A, Sarica K, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, Straub M, Türk C, Yuan Y, Knoll T (2017) Tract sizes in miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review from the european association of urology urolithiasis guidelines panel. Eur Urol 72(2):220–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2017.01.046

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Schilling D, Husch T, Bader M et al (2015) Nomenclature in PCNL or The Tower of Babel: a proposal for a uniform terminology. World J Urol 33:1905–1907

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Tepeler A, Sarica K (2013) Standard, mini, ultra-mini, and micro percutaneous nephrolithotomy: what is next? A novel labeling system for percutaneous nephrolithotomy according to the size of the access sheath used during procedure. Urolithiasis 41:367–368

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Traxer O, Smith TG 3rd, Pearle MS et al (2001) Renal parenchymal injury after standard and mini percutaneous nephrostolithotomy. J Urol 165:1693–1695

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Turk C, Petrik A, Sarica K et al (2016) EAU guidelines on interventional treatment for urolithiasis. Eur Urol 69:475–482

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Zeng G, Mai Z, Zhao Z et al (2013) Treatment of upper urinary calculi with Chinese minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a single-center experience with 12,482 consecutive patients over 20 years. Urolithiasis 41:225–229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Klinikum Sindelfingen-Böblingen, Arthur-Gruber-Str. 70, 71065, Sindelfingen, Germany

    Thomas Knoll

Authors
  1. Thomas Knoll
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas Knoll.

Additional information

On behalf of the International Collaboration in Endourology (ICE).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Knoll, T. Super-, perfect-, ultra-, micro-, mini-, …: does anybody benefit from miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy?. World J Urol 36, 319–320 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2120-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2120-7

Search

Navigation