Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKandemir, Abdulkadir
dc.contributor.authorGüven, Selçuk
dc.contributor.authorBalasar, Mehmet
dc.contributor.authorSönmez, Mehmet Giray
dc.contributor.authorTaşkapu, Hakan
dc.contributor.authorGürbüz, Recai
dc.date.accessioned10.07.201910:49:13
dc.date.accessioned2019-07-10T20:04:41Z
dc.date.available10.07.201910:49:13
dc.date.available2019-07-10T20:04:41Z
dc.date.issued2017en_US
dc.identifier.citationKandemir, A., Güven, S., Balasar, M., Sönmez, M., G., Taşkapu, H. ve Gürbüz, R. (2017). A prospective randomized comparison of micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy (Microperc) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the management of lower pole kidney stones. World Journal of Urology, 35(11), 1771-1776. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2058-9en_US
dc.identifier.issn0724-4983
dc.identifier.issn1433-8726
dc.identifier.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2058-9
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12511/4090
dc.descriptionWOS: 000413463500015en_US
dc.descriptionPubMed ID: 28589217en_US
dc.description.abstractTo make a comparison between the safety and efficacy of micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy (microperc) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the management of lower pole kidney stones up to 15 mm. 60 patients presenting with solitary lower pole kidney stones up to 15 mm were included in the study between March 2013 and December 2015. Patients were randomized into Microperc or RIRS groups with computer-generated numbers. The mean stone size was 10.6 (5-15) and 11.5 (7-15) mm for Microperc and RIRS groups, respectively (P = 0.213). In the Microperc group, the scopy time was 158.5 s, while in the RIRS group, the scopy time was 26.6 s (P = 0.001). The hospitalization period in the Microperc group was 542 h, while it was 19 h in the RIRS group (P = 0.001). No statistical differences were observed during the operating time, pre-operative-post-operative hemoglobin (Hb), serum creatinine, and estimated glomerular filtration speed (e-GFR) values and stone-free rates. No intraoperative complications were observed in either of the groups, while post-operative complications were observed in six patients in Microperc Group and five patients belonging to the RIRS Group (P = 0.922). Both Microperc and RIRS are safe and effective alternatives, and have similar stone clearance and complication rates for the management of lower pole kidney stones up to 15 mm in diameter. However, prolonged hospital stay and scopy times are the main disadvantages of Microperc and further research is needed to evaluate the renal tubular damages caused by both of these methods.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherSprıngeren_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectMicropercen_US
dc.subjectRetrograde Intrarenal Surgeryen_US
dc.subjectLower Pole Kidney Stonesen_US
dc.subjectFlexibleen_US
dc.subjectUreteroscopyen_US
dc.subjectPercutaneous Nephrolithotomyen_US
dc.titleA prospective randomized comparison of micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy (Microperc) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the management of lower pole kidney stonesen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.relation.journalWorld Journal of Urologyen_US
dc.departmentİstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Cerrahi Tıp Bilimleri Bölümü, Üroloji Ana Bilim Dalıen_US
dc.authorid0000-0002-5009-8435en_US
dc.identifier.volume35en_US
dc.identifier.issue11en_US
dc.identifier.startpage1771en_US
dc.identifier.endpage1776en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00345-017-2058-9en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record