Objective To compare the therapeutic effects of flexible ureteroscope(FURS),super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy(SMP),and microstomy percutaneous nephrolithotomy(MPCNL)in the treatment of 2-3 cm lower calyceal calculi.Methods Clinical data of 209 patients with 2-3 cm lower calyceal calculi in our hospital from January 2017 to September 2022 were retrospectively analyzed.Among them,65 patients were treated with Olympus electronic FURS(FURS group),62 patients were treated with SMP for stone removal(SMP group),and 82 patients were treated with MPCNL(MPCNL group).The one-session stone-free rate(SFR),operation time,hemoglobin decrease at postoperation immediately,rate of postoperative delayed bleeding,postoperative hospital stay,postoperative fever,and hospitalization cost were compared between the three groups.Results There were significant differences in operation time,postoperative hospital stay,hospitalization costs and one-session SFR among the three groups(P<0.05).The one-session SFR in the MPCNL group(89.0%,73/82)was significantly higher than that in the FURS group(72.3%,47/65;P =0.009).The operation time in the MPCNL group was(38.8±7.6)min,significantly shorter than that in the FURS group[(52.3±7.2)min,P =0.000]and the SMP group[(47.5±7.8)min,P =0.001].The hemoglobin decrease at postoperation immediately in the FURS group was(1.5±0.5)g/L,significantly lower than that in the SMP group[(5.0±1.6)g/L,P = 0.000]and MPCNL group[(6.3±1.8)g/L,P =0.000].The postoperative hospital stay in the FURS group was(2.2±0.5)d,significantly shorter than that in the SMP group[(3.5±0.8)d,P =0.000]and the MPCNL group[(5.3±1.4)d,P =0.000].The hospitalization cost of the FURS group was(22 543.4±1600.4)yuan,significantly lower than that of the SMP group[(26 837.7±2003.9)yuan,P =0.000]and the MPCNL group[(26 784.4±2086.9)yuan,P =0.000],but there was no significant difference between the SMP group and the MPCNL group(P =0.869).There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative fever among the three groups(χ2 = 0.462,P = 0.784).Conclusions FURS,SMP,and MPCNL are all effective methods for the treatment of 2-3 cm lower calyceal calculi.FURS has the least intraoperative bleeding,the shortest hospital stay,the lowest hospitalization cost,the lowest one-session stone-free rate,and the longest operation time.MPCNL has the shortest operation time,the highest one-session SFR,the most intraoperative bleeding,and the longest hospital stay.

Objective To compare the effectiveness and safety of ultramini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMP) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in treatment of moderate-sized (about 1-2 cm) renal lower caliceal calculi.Methods From March 2015 to December 2016,patients in our hospital scheduled for surgery due to renal lower caliceal calculi with the greatest diameter of 10-22 mm were prospectively analyzed.Patients were randomized into two groups according to the random number table.Group UMP's operational channel was only F14 and the nephroscope's diameter was 1 mm.200 μm holmium laser lithotripsy was used to break the stones which was rushed out by eddy cuurent.In Group RIRS,all patients needed placing a F6 double J stent preoperatively for two weeks.A flexible ureteroscope sheath required imbedding intraoperatively.The stones were smashed by 200 μm holmium laser lithotripsy through the WOLF flexible ureteroscope.The intraoperative and postoperative datas including stone-free status and the complications were compared.Results 100 patients were enrolled in the study 50 patients in Group UMP,28 were male and 22 were female,mean age was 43.4 ± 7.9 years old.Mean stone size was 14.5 ±3.0 mm(range 10-22 mm).Among them,18 cases were complicated with mild and moderate hydronephrosis.The other 50 cases were allocated to Group RIRS,including 31 males and 19 females.Their mean age was 44.5 ± 8.3 years old and mean stone size was 13.7 ± 3.1 mm (range 10-21 mm).Among them,16 cases were complicated with mild and moderate hydronephrosis.No statistically significant difference were seen between the two groups (P ＞ 0.05).After three months' follow-up,one-time stone free rate(SFR) of UMP group was 94.0％ (47/50),which was significantly more superior than the 72.0％ (36/50) of the RIRS group(P ＜ 0.05).The intraoperative decrease in hemoglobin were (7.8 ± 3.3) g/L vs.(3.1 ± 3.4) g/L,and operating time(26.5 ± 6.1) min vs.(43.3 ± 6.3) min.Significant differences were also seen between the two groups(P ＜0.05).There was more blood loss and less operating time in the group of UMP.The hospital stay,delayed hemorrhage and postoperative fever between the UMP and RIRS groups were (4.3±1.3)d vs.(3.24 ± 1.21)d,8.0％ (4/50)vs.0(0/50),16.0％ (8/50)vs.12.0％ (6/50) respectively.No significant differences were seen (P ＞ 0.05).Conclusions Both UMP and RIRS procedures are effective and safe in the treatment of moderate-sized renal lower caliceal calculi.Compared with RIRS,UMP may be more effective and has less operating time,however wtih more intraoperative blood loss.