Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To prospectively assess the safety and effectiveness of antegrade mini-percutaneous (miniperc) ureteroscopy (URS) and compare it with the conventional retrograde URS (RURS) approach in treating impacted proximal ureteric stones of 1-2 cm. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 60 patients admitted to the Department of Urology, Alexandria Main University Hospital, presenting with impacted proximal ureteric stones of 1-2 cm. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: Group A, were treated with RURS using a semi-rigid or flexible ureteroscope to access the stone; and Group B, were treated by antegrade miniperc URS, were a 14-F renal tract was obtained to pass a ureteric access sheath, then a flexible ureteroscope was used going downwards to the stone. Holmium laser was used for stone fragmentation. A JJ stent was inserted in all cases. Follow-up with non-contrast computed tomography was performed after 2 weeks. RESULTS: Both groups were comparable in terms of patient demographics and stone criteria. The stone-free rate was significantly higher in Group B (83.3%) compared to Group A (60%). The mean (SD) operative time was significantly shorter in Group A vs Group B, at 64.7 (±17.7) vs 112.0 (±15.3) min; while the mean lithotripsy time was comparable between the groups. The mean radiation exposure time was significantly less in Group A (11 s) compared to Group B (200 s). Both groups where comparable concerning minor complications, with no major complications. CONCLUSION: Antegrade miniperc flexible URS is safe and more effective than RURS for treating large impacted proximal ureteric stones. ABBREVIATIONS: ESWL: extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy; KUB: plain abdominal radiograph of the kidneys, ureters and bladder; miniperc: mini-percutaneous; PCNL: percutaneous nephrolithotomy; PCS: pelvi-calyceal system; SFR: stone-free rate; (R)URS: (retrograde) ureteroscopy.