Objective:To explore the clinical application value of 3D printing technology in percutaneous nephrolithotomy(PCNL) to complex renal calculi.Methods:The clinical data of 41 patients with complex renal calculi from May 2018 to October 2019, in the First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University and Xiang'an District of the First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University were retrospectively analyzed. There were 19 cases underwent PCNL after 3D printing (3D printing group), and 22 cases during the same period did not undergo 3D printing before operation (control group). Before operation, the two groups underwent CT plain scan enhanced examination. In 3D printing group, 3D printing technology was used to obtain 3D renal models, then 3D renal models were used for preoperative design and simulation of surgical puncture and preoperative conversation.The control group only underwent PCNL after routine examination.The ages of the patients in 3D printing group and control group were (42.9±2.5) vs. (41.3±2.9) years old, male/female ratio 11/8 vs. 12/10, body mass index (22.4±1.1) vs. (23.2±1.4) kg/m 2, serum creatinine (42.9±2.5) vs. (78.2±4.5) μmol/L, stone size (5.0±1.2) vs. (5.2±1.3) cm, the CT values of the stones was (930±210) vs.(950±200) HU. The difference of above parameters was not statistically significant ( P>0.05). The following indexes were compared between the two groups: score of questionnaire on satisfaction of preoperative conversation, and datas about operation and postopetation. Results:All the operations were successfully completed. The time of locating the target calyces in 3D printing group and control group was (3.3±1.3) vs. (5.3±3.1) min, and the coincidence of puncture calices was 94.7% (18/19) vs. 54.5%(12/22), and the stone removal rate of the 3D printing group was 78.9% (17/19) vs. 36.4% (8/22), 3D printing group was better than the control group in these respects( P < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in postoperative complications [21.0% (4/19) vs. 13.6% (3/22)], multi-channel[89.4% (17/19) vs. 86.4% (19/22)], operation time [(121.8±20.2) vs. (132.1±18.5) min], time of hospitalization [(7.6±1.3) vs. (8.0±1.8)d] and time of extubation for renal fistula [(3.8±1.7)vs. (4.5±2.0 )d] (all P > 0.05). During preoperative conversation between the 3D printing group and the control group , the time spent on signing the consent [(17.0±3.9) vs.(21.0±3.3) min], the degree of understanding of the stone condition [(2.5±0.6)vs.(2.0±1.2) points], the degree of understanding of the PCNL surgical process and complications [(2.6±0.6) vs.(1.8±1.3) points] and the degree of satisfaction with the doctor’s preoperative conversation effects [(2.4±0.9) vs.(1.7±1.6) points]were significantly different in comparisons ( P<0.05). Conclusions:3D printing technology can be used in PCNL to directly display the internal anatomical relationship of renal calculi, guide accurate preoperative designing, help improve the operation efficiency and stone clearance rate, and can also be used as a mold in preoperative conversation to improve communication efficiency.