Comparison of Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy with Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Removal of Renal Stones in Adults

Main Article Content

Asif Alam Khan
Inam Malkani
Junaid Jameel Khattak
Hassan Mumtaz
Mubashir Mazhar
Falak Naz
Arsalan Riaz


hemoglobin, mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy, operative time, renal stone, standard procedure, stone removal


Renal stones are the third most common problem affecting about 10% of global population. The management of nephrolithiasis has undergone a complete transformation since the 1980s. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) has established itself an effective and safe technique that delivers high stone-free rate as well as overall shorter treatment time. We aim to compare the outcome of mini-PCNL with standard-PCNL in patients presenting with renal stones. In all, 90 patients fulfilled the selection criteria and randomized into two groups. Group A underwent mini-PCNL whereas Group B underwent standard-PCNL. Pre-operative hemoglobin level was recorded. Duration of procedure as well as drop in hemoglobin level was also recorded. A kidney, ureter, and bladder (KUB) X-ray was performed to confirm the presence of stone and stone-free status. The mean age of patients in mini-PCNL group was 43.11 years and in standard-PCNL group, it was 36.91 years. The mean stone size in patients of mini-PCNL group was 29.53 mm and 31.58 mm in standard-PCNL group. The mean duration of renal stone in mini-PCNL group was 1.91 years and that in standard-PCNL group 1.80 years. The mean operative time in mini-PCNL group was 59.56 min and 61.22 min in standard-PCNL group. The mean fall in hemoglobin in mini-PCNL group was 0.38 g/dL and that in standard-PCNL group 0.51 g/dL. In mini-PCNL group, stone clearance was observed in 42 (93.3%) patients, while in standard-PCNL group, it was observed in 45 (100%) patients. This difference was insignificant (P > 0.05). Mini-PCNL and standard-PCNL have no significant differences in terms of outcome, operative time, and stone clearance, although fall in hemoglobin level was less in mini-PCNL group, which showed less blood loss in this group, thereby making it a more appropriate method for renal stone removal.


Download data is not yet available.
Abstract 163 | PDF Downloads 65 HTML Downloads 20 XML Downloads 39


1. Shohab D, Iqbal N, Alam MU, Butt A, Jamil MI, Hussain  I, Akhter S. Comparison of Outcome of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Adult Versus Paediatric Patients. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2016 May;26(5):371–3. PMID: 27225140.
2. Ahmad S, Ansari TM, Shad MA. Prevalence of renal calculi. Profl Med J. 2016;23(04):389–95. TPMJ/16.2893
3. Albala DM, Assimos DG, Clayman RV, Denstedt JD, Grasso M, Gutierrez-Aceves J, et al. Lower pole I: a prospective randomized trial of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrostolithotomy for lower pole nephrolithiasis-initial results. J Urol. 2001 Dec;166(6):2072–80. https://doi. org/10.1016/s0022-5347(05)65508-5. Erratum in: J Urol 2002 Apr;167(4):1805. PMID: 11696709.
4. Ferakis N, Stavropoulos M. Mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of renal and upper ureteral stones: Lessons learned from a review of the literature. Urol Annals. 2015;7(2):141.
5. Agrawal MS, Agarwal K, Jindal T, Sharma M. Ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A minimally-invasive option for percutaneous stone removal. Indian J Urol. 2016 Apr-Jun;32(2):132–6. PMID: 27127356; PMCID: PMC4831502.
6. Srisubat A, Potisat S, Lojanapiwat B, Setthawong V, Laopaiboon M. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Nov 24;(11):CD007044. CD007044.pub3. PMID: 25418417.
7. Kumar R, Anand A, Saxena V, Seth A, Dogra PN, Gupta NP. Safety and efficacy of PCNL for management of staghorn cal-culi in pediatric patients. J Pediatr Urol. 2011 Jun;7(3):248–51. Epub 2011 Apr 27. PMID: 21527225.
8. Haghighi R, Zeraati H, Zade MG. Ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) versus standard PCNL: A randomised clinical trial. Arab J Urol. 2017;15(4):294–8.
9. Desai J, Zeng G, Zhao Z, Zhong W, Chen W, Wu W. 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;2013:490793. Epub 2013 Jul 24. PMID: 23984372; PMCID: PMC3741699.
10. Helal M, Black T, Lockhart J, Figueroa TE. The Hickman peel-away sheath: alternative for pediatric percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol. 1997 Jun;11(3):171–2. end.1997.11.171. PMID: 9181444.
11. Zeng G. Mini-PCNL versus standard-PCNL for the management of 20-40-mm size kidney stones: The initial result of a multi-center randomized controlled trial. Eur Urol Suppl. 2018;17(2):e1224.
12. Ghani KR, Andonian S, Bultitude M, Desai M, Giusti  G, Okhunov Z, et al. Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Update, Trends, and Future Directions. Eur Urol. 2016 Aug;70(2):382–96. Epub 2016 Feb 11. PMID: 26876328.
13. Rodrigues PL, Vilaça JL, Oliveira C, Cicione A, Rassweiler J, Fonseca J, et al. Collecting system percutaneous access using real-time tracking sensors: first pig model in vivo experience. J Urol. 2013 Nov;190(5):1932–7. juro.2013.05.042. Epub 2013 May 25. PMID: 23714434.
14. Michel MS, Trojan L, Rassweiler JJ. Complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol. 2007;51(4):899–906.
15. Jackman SV, Docimo SG, Cadeddu JA, Bishoff JT, Kavoussi LR, Jarrett TW. The “mini-perc” technique: a less invasive alternative to percutaneous nephrolithotomy. World J Urol. 1998;16(6):371– 4. PMID: 9870281.
16. Monga M, Oglevie S. Minipercutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol. 2000;14(5):419–21.
17. Lahme S, Bichler KH, Strohmaier WL, Götz T. Minimally invasive PCNL in patients with renal pelvic and calyceal stones. Eur Urol. 2001 Dec;40(6):619–24. 10.1159/000049847. PMID: 11805407.
18. Zhong W, Zeng G, Wu K, Li X, Chen W, Yang H. Does a smaller tract in percutaneous nephrolithotomy contribute to high renal pelvic pressure and postoperative fever? J Endourol. 2008 Sep;22(9):2147–51. PMID: 18811571.
19. Sebaey A, Khalil MM, Soliman T, Mohey A, Elshaer W, Kandil W, Omar R. Standard versus tubeless mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A randomised controlled trial. Arab J Urol. 2016 Mar;14(1):18–23. Epub 2016 Jan 20. PMID: 26966588; PMCID: PMC4767792.
20. Salem HK, Morsi H, Omran A, Daw M A. Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children. J Pediat Urol. 2007;3(3):235–8.
21. Ni S, Qiyin C, Tao W, Liu L, Jiang H, Hu H, et al. Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy is associated with less pain and shorter hospitalization compared with standard or small bore drainage: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. Urology. 2011 Jun;77(6):1293–8. Epub 2011 Jan 22. PMID: 21256562.
22. Alshoabi SA,  Alhamodi DS, Gameraddin MB,  Babiker MS, Omer AM, Al-Dubai SA. A randomized comparison of totally tubeless and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy in elderly patients. Urology 2010;76(2):289–93. urology.2009.11.077
23. Shoma AM, Elshal AM. Nephrostomy tube placement after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: Critical evaluation through a prospective randomized study. Urology. 2012;79(4):771–6.
24. Bilen CY, Gunay M, Ozden E, Kubilay Inci,  Saban Sarikaya, Serdar Tekgul. Tubeless mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in infants and preschool children: A preliminary report. J Urol. 2010;184(6):2498–503.
25. ElSheemy MS, Elmarakbi AA, Hytham M, Ibrahim H, Khadgi  S, Al-Kandari AM. Mini vs standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal stones: a comparative study. Urolithiasis. 2019 Apr;47(2):207–214. s00240-018-1055-9. Epub 2018 Mar 16. PMID: 29549382.