Mini-PCNL Versus Standard-PCNL For The Management of 20-40 mm Size Kidney Stones
NCT ID: NCT02635048
Last Updated: 2020-03-05
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
1980 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2016-01-01
2019-08-20
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
To solve this problem, we performed this multicenter, parallel, open-label randomized controlled trial (RCT).
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Suction Mini-PCNL Versus Standard PCNL for the Management of 2-4cm Kidney Stones
NCT05088213
Flexible Ureteroscopy With Tip-bendable Suction Ureteral Access Sheath Versus Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Treatment of 2-3cm Renal Stones
NCT06526390
The 18F Peel-way Sheath Versus the 18F Access Sheath With a Suction-evacuation Function MPCNL for the Management of 2-5cm Size Kidney Stones
NCT03206515
Standard-PCNL vs Mini-PCNL vs Super-mini PCNL for the Treatment of ≥2 cm Renal Stone
NCT03771365
SMP vs RIRS for Symptomatic Lower Pole Renal Calculi of 10-20 mm Size: a Randomized Controlled Trial
NCT02519634
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Each center performs more than 500 PNL procedures per year. Ethics committee approval was obtained at each site and informed consent was taken from each patient. The primary endpoint was the one-session SFR and the secondary endpoints included intraoperative and postoperative parameters.
This study will be started at January,2016 and ended at November ,2019. The SFR of sPNL and mPNL was assumed to be 83% and 89% respectively, based on the earlier data. -10% was considered as a non-inferiority margin. the type-1 error (α) was set to 0.05 and the power (1-β) to 0.8. Sampling ratio was 1. According to the formulas of 2-sample non-inferiority test comparing two proportions, the minimum sample size for each group was 923 using a power and sample size calculator (HyLown Consulting, Atlanta). Considering the patients lost to follow-up and consent withdrawals, the number was increased to 1000 patients in each group.
Randomization We used SPSS software to generate 2000 random numbers in a table with a ratio of 1:1 ("0" for sPNL and "1" for mPNL). A protocol-blinded coordinator revealed the assignment in sequence to the center once the consent was signed and surgery was scheduled. The number of included patients was not equally distributed among the centers.
Quality control A standard operating procedure (SOP) was made and approved by the principal investigator of each center. Routine monitoring visits to all centers were carried out every month.
Intravenous urography (IVU) and 2 mm non-contrasted CT were done in all patients. CT value was measured with a consistent software in each center. Patients had negative urine culture before treatment. Intravenous single dose of 1st/2nd-generation cephalosporin or ciprofloxacin was administered 30 mins before and after surgery as antibiotic prophylaxis.
All the endoscopic procedures were performed by only one designated experienced surgeon (≥100 procedures per year in both sPNL and mPNL) in each center. All the procedures were performed under general anesthesia and in the prone position. A 5 Fr open-ended ureteral catheter was placed to the renal pelvis through a guide wire. The use of fluoroscopic or/and ultrasonic guidance was determined by the surgeons' preference. An 18-gauge needle was used for puncture. As shown in Fig. 1, the access tract was gradually dilated with fascial introducers (Reborn Medical®) up to 18F (mPNL) or 24F (sPNL). A peel-away sheath was used (Reborn Medical®). The stone was fragmented by pneumatic LithoClast®, or holmium laser with a 550-um laser fiber (Lumenis® and an energy setting of 30-50 W) or ultrasonic lithotripsy (EMS®, only sPNL group). The stone free status was routinely evaluated by fluoroscopy (radiopaque stone) or ultrasound (radio lucent stone). An immediate second-look or another puncture would be performed if needed. A 6 Fr double J stent was inserted for 4 weeks. A 16-18F silastic nephrostomy tube was placed and removed before discharge. Indication for tubeless/total tubeless: absence of major perforation of collecting system, bleeding and/or complete stone clearance.
K.U.B. (kidney-ureter-bladder) plain radiograph and renal ultrasound were used to evaluate the residual stones before discharge. If there was a discrepancy between the presence of residual stones between the KUB and renal ultrasound, a 2 mm non-contrast CT was ordered to better delineate the presence of residual stones and their impact on the clinical management. The status of residual stones was according to the reports assessed by two protocol-blinded radiologists. If the largest residual stone was larger than 6 mm, SWL, RIRS or URL would be recommended before removing double J stent. The one-session SFR (primary outcome) was determined at one month after removing double J stent and defined as either the absence of any residual stone fragments or the presence of clinically insignificant residual stone fragments (CIRFs), without any auxiliary procedures.
The hematocrit drop was measured at 8 am on postoperative day 1. The indications for transfusion was strictly monitored according to the guideline of Chinese Society of Blood Transfusion (hemoglobin less than 70g/l or a progressive decrease in hemoglobin after surgeries). Consideration of angiography and selective angio-embolization for patients with significant macroscopic hematuria in the urine as well as progressive decrease in hemoglobin or unstable hemodynamics. Visual analogue scale (VAS) was used as a pain scale for quantification of postoperative pain at 24h after surgeries.14 VAS was evaluated by two protocol-blinded nurses. Patients with VAS greater than 5 were given nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Stone composition was analyzed using uniform instruments (Fourier Transform-Infrared Spectrometry, Thermo®) and method in all participated centers.
Data collection and definitions of parameters The characteristics of patients and clinical outcomes were recorded according to the pre-established case report form (CRF) . Surgical outcomes were predicted preoperatively according to the S·T·O·N·E nephrolithometry. The stone size was the largest diameter of a single stone or the summation of the largest diameters of multiple stones. Operation time was defined as the time from puncture to the placement of the nephrostomy tube or removing the access sheath in cases with tubeless or total tubeless. Septic shock was identified using the clinical criteria of persisting hypotension requiring vasopressor therapy to maintain mean mean artery pressure (MAP) ≥65 mmHg and having a serum lactate level ≥ 2 mmol/L (\>18mg/dL) despite adequate fluid resuscitation.
Statistical analysis Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 20·0. Continuous variables were analyzed using Student's t-test to compare the two means. Categorical variables between groups were analyzed using the chi-squared or Fisher's exact tests. Primary endpoints and some key secondary endpoints were analyzed in both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) population. Odds ratio (OR) for sPNL compared with mPNL in categorical variables. Mean difference for sPNL compared with mPNL in continuous variables. P \<0·05 was considered statistically significant.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Group 1
Patients in Group 1 undergo mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy
Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
patients undergo PNCL with 18Fr nephrostomy tract
Group 2
Patients in Group 2 undergo percutaneous nephrolithotomy
Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
patients undergo PNCL with 24Fr nephrostomy tract
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
patients undergo PNCL with 18Fr nephrostomy tract
Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
patients undergo PNCL with 24Fr nephrostomy tract
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. Age 18 to 70 years
3. Normal renal function
4. ASA score Ⅰ and Ⅱ
5. Renal stones 20-40mm
Exclusion Criteria
2. Uncorrected coagulopathy and active urinary tract infection (UTI)
3. Morbid obese patients
4. Patients who underwent transplant or urinary diversion.
5. Congenital abnormalities.
18 Years
70 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Baoshan No.2 People's Hospital
UNKNOWN
The Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University
OTHER
First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University
OTHER
People's Hospital of Nanhai District, Foshan
UNKNOWN
Yichang Yiling Hospital
UNKNOWN
Suzhou Municipal Hospital
OTHER
First Affiliated Hospital of Gannan Medical University
OTHER
General Hospital of Shenyang Military Region
OTHER
Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine
OTHER
The Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University
OTHER
Beijing Chuiyangliu Hospital
OTHER_GOV
Fujian Medical University Union Hospital
OTHER
Shengjing Hospital
OTHER
181st hospital of Chinese People's Liberation Army
OTHER
First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University
OTHER
Jiangmen Central Hospital
OTHER
China-Japan Union Hospital, Jilin University
OTHER
The Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University
OTHER
Jining First People's Hospital
OTHER
The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Guohua Zeng
Vice president
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Guohua Zeng, PH.D & MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Department of Urology, Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University
Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
MRER(67)2015
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.