Kidney StoneNCT04767919
MIP Versus PCNL for Kidney Stone Disease
A study testing Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (sPCNL) and Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (MIP) in people with Kidney Stone, run by University of California, San Diego at 6 sites in 2 countries.
Trial summary
The decision to use standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) versus mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MIP) has been a subject of much debate in the urological community. The investigators propose a randomized controlled trial to compare the operative outcomes and complications of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Kidney Stone
- What is being tested?
- Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (sPCNL) and Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (MIP)
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 75 participants
- Where
- 6 sitesin 2 countries
- Study dates
- 1 Jan 2021to 7 Jun 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Patients with planned PCNL and a preoperative CT scan
- Urologist obtained access and prone positioning during surgery
- Tract dilation performed either using balloon dilator or a single step mini-PCNL dilation
- Age: ≥18 years' old
- Stone size: 10-25mm
- Gender: Male and female patients
Show all 10Show fewer
- Patients of all ethnic backgrounds
- Capable of giving informed consent
- Capable and willing to fulfill the requirements of the study
- Pre-existing indwelling nephrostomy tube or ureteral stent permitted
Who cannot join
- Anticoagulated or history of coagulopathy (with the exception of daily 81 mg aspirin)
- Conversion to open procedure
- Multiple access tracts
- Inability to give informed consent or unable to meet requirements of the study for any reason
Trial locations and contacts
6 sites in 2 countries.
6 sites in 2 countries
United States5 sites
Cleveland Clinic
Cleveland, Ohio, 44195
Ohio State Unversity
Columbus, Ohio, 43210
Vanderbilt University Medical Center
Nashville, Tennessee, 37232
Mayo Clinic
Phoenix, Arizona, 85054
University of California, San Diego, Medical Center
San Diego, California, 92103
About this study
Official title: Randomized Controlled Trial to Compare the Operative Outcomes and Complications of Mini-percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (Mini-PCNL) Versus Standard PCNL
The decision to use standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) versus mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MIP) has been a subject of much debate in the urological community. The investigators propose a randomized controlled trial to compare the operative outcomes and complications of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) versus standard PCNL for renal stones. The results of this study will help guide the decision making regarding these two procedures in the US population and provide further insight into the utility and safety of these procedures. A cost analysis will be performed, and it is hypothesized that the reusable components of the Storz MIP set will result in lower costs of the mini-PCNL procedure compared to standard PCNL.
Read the detailed description
Presurgical management will follow the standard of care and patients with active urinary tract infections will be treated prior to kidney stone surgery. After the informed consent process, the subject will be asked to complete the Wisconsin Stone Quality of Life Index (WISQOL), an externally validated and internally consistent questionnaire designed specifically for kidney stones patients. All patients should receive a computerized tomography (CT) scan prior to their procedure as standard of care for assessment of stone burden and access planning. This preoperative imaging will be assessed and scored using the standardized STONE scoring system, which has been validated for predicting treatment success and perioperative complications following PCNL.
Prior to their procedure patients will be randomized to receive one of the two interventions outlined above, only study subjects will be blinded to the randomization. Randomization will be conducted centrally for each site to ensure balance of PCNL and mini-PCNL using the CCF-Redcap randomization module to ensure proper randomization between sites. Randomization can occur at any time after enrollment prior to surgery. Study subjects will be selected from a patient pool where PCNL or mini-PCNL would be considered equally viable alternative Standard of Care procedures for treatment of kidney stone disease, with neither procedure presenting any benefit over the other. The randomization of procedure for this pool of study subjects was to guarantee that an equal number of both procedures were performed in the trial throughout all centers.
Patients choosing to participate in this research study will not be informed of which procedure they received to minimize any bias regarding postoperative pain and quality of life scores. No changes to the disclosure process will be made for any other variations or complications during their procedure outside of the research study interventions. Due to the time between the initial surgical procedure and postoperative follow-up visit there is a risk of unintentional unblinding by other providers involved with the care of study patients and access to their medical records. As such patients will be asked at the time of their follow-up visit if they remained blinded to their procedure type. Whenever possible patients should remain blinded but unblinding is not an exclusion criterion as the primary endpoint, change in hemoglobin, should not be affected by this knowledge.
A pre-operative complete blood count and basic metabolic panel will be obtained. Two endoscopic stone procedure types will be investigated in this study. The first, a standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (sPCNL)- performed using a 30 Fr access sheath following balloon dilation. The second, a mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL)- performed using an 18 Fr access sheath following either balloon dilation or dilation using a single step metal dilator. Both procedures will be performed under general anesthesia with the patient in prone position. Access technique (triangulation method, ultrasound guided, or endoscopically guided) will be at the discretion of the attending surgeon. Stone lithotripter type (pneumatic, ultrasonic, or laser) and retrieval method (basket, forceps) will similarly be at the discretion of the urologist. Placement of ureteral stents will be left up to the discretion of the surgeon. Placement of nephrostomy tubes will be recorded as a protocol deviation and the indication for placement recorded. Whenever possible a single access tract will be used for the procedure and if multiple access sites are required it will be recorded as a protocol deviation. Following completion of the procedure and closure of the access tract, pressure will be applied to the surgical site for one minute. Patients with plans for a staged bilateral PCNL should only be enrolled for their first operation and should complete the quality-of-life questionnaire and imaging requirements described below prior to their second procedure.
Renal pelvis pressure monitoring is not part of the standard of care and is included as an outcome for research purposes only. There is no additional risk to the patient when monitoring this pressure and patients will be informed of this during the informed consent process.
Using a flexible cystoscope, a 5 Fr open-ended ureteral catheter will be positioned in the ureteropelvic junction for recording renal pelvis pressures. Following placement, the catheter will be secured and attached to arterial line pressure transducer positioned at the level of the kidney and connected to an invasive blood pressure (IBP) port. The arterial line pressure transducer will be fixed to IV pole at the level of the kidney and adjusted during the case if the patient bed is repositioned during the case. Transducer tubing should be flushed with normal saline to remove any air and pressure should be zeroed without any pressure being applied to the surgical site. Pressure monitoring and zeroing should be established after obtaining access but prior to active stone fragmentation or extraction and continue until closure of the access tract.
Continuous data monitoring and recording will be achieved via attaching the IBP port either on a portable vital signs monitor or the main anesthesia monitoring system. Data points should be recorded continuously whenever possible. Data will be either extracted manually from the portable monitor or automatically through the anesthesia monitoring system. Analysis of these data points to determine the mean RPP, time above >30mmHg, and maximum RPP can be conducted at the individual sites and included as part of their data set transfer or deidentified data sets can be sent to CCF for analysis of those endpoints.
Post-operatively, patients will be admitted to the hospital and monitored per usual clinical procedure. A complete blood count will be obtained on postoperative day 0, preferably in recovery, and on postoperative day 1. A basic metabolic panel will also be obtained prior to discharge. Further laboratory tests will be dictated by the patients' clinical status and length of stay. If patient length of stay exceeds one day the final complete blood count prior to discharge will also be recorded.
Along with their standard postoperative day 1 labs, an additional red topped tube (4-10ml) for IL-6 and procalcitonin will also be collected. This sample will need to be processed with several hours of collection using a centrifuge and the serum aliquots placed in cryovials prior to freezing. Individual research sites will be responsible for the lab draw, centrifuge process, freezing, and shipping of IL-6 and procalcitonin serum samples. These may be stored on site and shipped in bulk periodically or upon conclusion of patient enrollment per the preference of the study coordinator at each site. All these samples will be analyzed in bulk at the conclusion of the recruitment period.
Since higher irrigating pressures during PCNL have been linked to higher rates of the systemic inflammatory response (SIRS) this will also be included as a secondary endpoint. The criteria for SIRS will be defined as any two of the following conditions: heart rate >90 beats per minute, respiratory rate >20 respirations per minute, serum white blood cell count greater than 12,000/high power field or less than 4,000/high power field and temperature >38.0 ⁰C or <36.0 ⁰C.
Postoperative complications will be classified using the Clavien-Dindo system which has been modified for use following percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Standard of care procedures will be followed for patients requiring postoperative blood transfusions. Postoperative pain management will be left up to the discretion of the attending surgeon. The patient will be discharged from the hospital per the usual clinical protocols with a planned clinic visit between 4 and 6 weeks after surgery. In the interval following surgery readmissions, ED visits, and reoperations for study patients should be recorded.
As part of the standard of care for PCNL patients, both a renal ultrasound and a kidney, ureter, and bladder x-ray study obtained between 4 and 6 weeks postoperatively. Imaging will be reviewed by a blinded radiologist for assessment of stone free rate, defined as no visible stone fragments on either imaging set. Any discrepancies between ultrasound and x-ray modalities will be resolved with a follow-up CT scan.
If a patient receives a postoperative CT scan for another indication, this scan will take the place of the KUB and U/S for determining stone free rate. Additional data points such as parenchymal thickness at target calyx will for also be assessed for swelling/fluid accumulation.
The WISQL questionnaire, the same administered following initial consent, will be given at the 4-6 week follow-up visit to track any differences in quality of life between the two procedures. The WISQOL questionnaire specifically asks for the patients to provide answer statements that reflect their quality of life over the past four weeks. For the purposes of the second instance of the questionnaire, study subjects will be instructed to answer with respect to their symptoms since their procedure, to encompass patients who may have their follow-up visit scheduled more than four weeks from their procedure date.
The timeline for study subject participation and the required tests is presented below.
Procedures Preoperative POD0 POD1 Weeks 4-6 Informed consent X CT Scan X WISQOL Survey X X CBC X X X BMP or CMP X X Randomization X Intraoperative RPP X Serum sample (IL-6 and PCT) X KUB and renal U/S X
- Conditions
- Kidney Stone
- Being tested
- Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (sPCNL), Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (MIP)
- Keywords
- Nephrolithotomy Laser Percutaneous Kidney Stone
- Medical subject headings
- Kidney Calculi
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (sPCNL)Procedure or surgery
Endoscopic stone procedure using a laser placed in the kidney through an 30 Fr access sheath following balloon dilation.
Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (MIP)Procedure or surgery
Endoscopic stone procedure using a laser placed in the kidney through an 18 Fr access sheath following either balloon dilation or dilation using a single step metal dilator.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (sPCNL) | Active comparator | The first arm will consist of a Standard of Care standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (sPCNL)- performed using a 30 Fr access sheath following balloon dilation. Receives: Procedure: Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (sPCNL) |
| Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (MIP) | Active comparator | The second arm will consist of a Standard of Care mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL)- performed using an 18 Fr access sheath following either balloon dilation or dilation using a single step metal dilator. Receives: Procedure: Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (MIP) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Blood Loss
Blood loss during study operative procedure, up to 4 hours on average, as estimated by hemoglobin levels measured immediately after surgery.
Measured: Intraoperative period, up to 4 hours on average.
Secondary outcomes (17)
Intraoperative Complication Rates
Complication rates occurring during the study operative procedure, up to 4 hours on average, including infundibular and pelvic wall tears and sheath slippage out of parenchyma, measured for all study subjects through study completion, an average of 1 year.
Measured: Intraoperative period, up to 4 hours on average.
Renal Pressure
Operative renal pelvis pressure, measured in mm Hg, measured by a catheter placed transurethral in the ureteropelvic junction during study operative procedure, up to 4 hours on average, measured for every study subject through study completion, up to 1 year on average.
Measured: Intraoperative period, up to 4 hours on average.
Operation Time
Length of time of study operative procedure, up to 4 hours on average, measured in hours, measured for every study subject through study completion, up to 1 year on average.
Measured: Intraoperative period, up to 4 hours on average.
Anesthesia Time
Length of time of administration of anesthesia measured in hours during study operative procedure, up to 4 hours on average, measured for every study subject through study completion, up to 1 year on average.
Measured: Intraoperative period, up to 4 hours on average.
Hospital Stay Time
Length of time of stay in hospital measured in hours, beginning from time study subject leaves operating room after completion of study procedure to the time study subject is discharged from the hospital for study procedure, 24 hours on average, measured for every study subject through study completion, an average of 1 year.
Measured: Postoperative period, 24 hours on average.
Pain Medication Dose
Dose of pain medication administered to study subject beginning from the time study subject leaves the operating room after completion of study procedure, to the time study subject is discharged from the hospital for study procedure, 24 hours on average, measured for every study subject through study completion, an average of 1 year.
Measured: Postoperative period, 24 hours on average.
Urine Output
Volume of urine produced by study subject, measured in milliliters, beginning from time study subject leaves operating room after completion of study procedure to discharge from the hospital for study procedure, 24 hours on average, measured for every study subject through study completion, an average of 1 year.
Measured: Postoperative period, 24 hours on average.
ED Visits
Frequency of visits to emergency room, beginning from time study subject leaves operating room after completion of study procedure to the time study subject exits the study, up to 6 weeks, measured for every study subject through study completion, an average of 1 year.
Measured: Postoperative period, up to 6 weeks.
Readmission
Frequency of readmission to hospital, beginning from time study subject leaves operating room after completion of study procedure to the time study subject exits the study, up to 6 weeks, measured for every study subject through study completion, an average of 1 year.
Measured: Postoperative period, up to 6 weeks.
Reoperation
Frequency of reoperation on same side kidney as original study procedure, beginning from time study subject leaves operating room after completion of study procedure to the time study subject exits the study, up to 6 weeks, measured for every study subject through study completion, an average of 1 year.
Measured: Postoperative period, up to 6 weeks.
Imaging
Presence of stone fragments as viewed on imaging of kidney by CT scan, KUB, or ultrasound, beginning from time study subject leaves operating room after completion of study procedure to the time study subject exits the study, up to 6 weeks, measured for every study subject through study completion, an average of 1 year.
Measured: Postoperative period, up to 6 weeks
Quality of Life Questionnnaire
Results of Wisconsin Quality of Life Survey, measured from 1 to 5 with 1 being very true and always and 5 being not at all true and never, administered beginning from time study subject leaves operating room after completion of study procedure to the time study subject exits the study, up to 6 weeks, measured for every study subject through study completion, an average of 1 year.
Measured: Postoperative period, up to 6 weeks.
IL-6 Results
Measurement of Interlukin-6 in picograms per milliliters immediately after completion of study operative procedure, 0-8 hours on average, measured for every study subject through study completion, an average of 1 year.
Measured: Postoperative period, up to 8 hours on average.
PCT Results
Measurement of procalcitonin in nanograms per milliliters immediately after completion of study procedure, 0-8 hours on average, measured for every study subject through study completion, an average of 1 year.
Measured: Postoperative period, up to 8 hours on average.
Pain Intensity
Pain measured using Stanford Pain Scale, a 0-10 scale with 10 being the greatest pain, beginning from time study subject leaves operating room after completion of study operative procedure to the time study subject exits the study, up to 6 weeks, measured for every study subject through study completion, an average of 1 year.
Measured: Postoperative period, up to 6 weeks.
Postoperative Complication Rates
Complications rates beginning from time study subject leaves operating room after completion of study procedures to exit from study, up to 6 weeks, including fever, SIRS, blood transfusion, pleural effusions, urine leak, urinary retention, perirenal hematoma or urinoma, post-operative stent placement, ICU admission, and Clavien-Dindo Classification, measured for every study subject through study completion, an average of 1 year.
ed study procedures
Measured: Postoperative period, up to 6 weeks.
Pain Medication Frequency
Frequency of pain medication administered to study subject beginning from the time study subject leaves the operating room after completion of study procedure, to the time study subject is discharged from the hospital for study procedure, 24 hours on average, measured for every study subject through study completion, an average of 1 year.
Measured: [Time Frame: Postoperative period, 24 hours on average.]
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted23 Feb 2021
- Study start1 Jan 2021
- Primary completion7 Jun 2024
- Study completion7 Jun 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (25)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Kidney StoneStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Subjects will be assigned to one of two Standard of Care treatments for kidney stone disease and complete their treatment using one treatment modality.
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 75 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, San Diego
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Seth Bechis, University of California, San Diego
- Investigators
- Manoj Monga, M.D., Study chair, UCSD Medical Center, San Diego
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04767919
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 191269
- Status last verified
- Mar 2025
- First submitted
- 20 Jan 2021
- Last updated
- 27 Mar 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Assimos D, Krambeck A, Miller NL, Monga M, Murad MH, Nelson CP, Pace KT, Pais VM Jr, Pearle MS, Preminger GM, Razvi H, Shah O, Matlaga BR. Surgical Management of Stones: American Urological Association/Endourological Society Guideline, PART I. J Urol. 2016 Oct;196(4):1153-60. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.05.090. Epub 2016 May 27.
PubMed 27238616Desai MR, Sharma R, Mishra S, Sabnis RB, Stief C, Bader M. Single-step percutaneous nephrolithotomy (microperc): the initial clinical report. J Urol. 2011 Jul;186(1):140-5. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.03.029. Epub 2011 May 14.
PubMed 21575966Zeng G, Wan S, Zhao Z, Zhu J, Tuerxun A, Song C, Zhong L, Liu M, Xu K, Li H, Jiang Z, Khadgi S, Pal SK, Liu J, Zhang G, Liu Y, Wu W, Chen W, Sarica K. Super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SMP): a new concept in technique and instrumentation. BJU Int. 2016 Apr;117(4):655-61. doi: 10.1111/bju.13242. Epub 2015 Aug 22.
PubMed 26220396Desai J, Solanki R. Ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMP): one more armamentarium. BJU Int. 2013 Nov;112(7):1046-9. doi: 10.1111/bju.12193. Epub 2013 Jul 11.
PubMed 23841665Jackman SV, Docimo SG, Cadeddu JA, Bishoff JT, Kavoussi LR, Jarrett TW. The "mini-perc" technique: a less invasive alternative to percutaneous nephrolithotomy. World J Urol. 1998;16(6):371-4. doi: 10.1007/s003450050083.
PubMed 9870281Giusti G, Piccinelli A, Taverna G, Benetti A, Pasini L, Corinti M, Teppa A, Zandegiacomo de Zorzi S, Graziotti P. Miniperc? No, thank you! Eur Urol. 2007 Mar;51(3):810-4; discussion 815. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.07.047. Epub 2006 Aug 11.
PubMed 16938385Xu S, Shi H, Zhu J, Wang Y, Cao Y, Li K, Wang Y, Sun Z, Xia S. A prospective comparative study of haemodynamic, electrolyte, and metabolic changes during percutaneous nephrolithotomy and minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy. World J Urol. 2014 Oct;32(5):1275-80. doi: 10.1007/s00345-013-1204-2. Epub 2013 Nov 1.
PubMed 24177788Guler A, Erbin A, Ucpinar B, Savun M, Sarilar O, Akbulut MF. Comparison of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the treatment of large kidney stones: a randomized prospective study. Urolithiasis. 2019 Jun;47(3):289-295. doi: 10.1007/s00240-018-1061-y. Epub 2018 Jun 1.
PubMed 29858913Sakr A, Salem E, Kamel M, Desoky E, Ragab A, Omran M, Fawzi A, Shahin A. Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs standard PCNL for management of renal stones in the flank-free modified supine position: single-center experience. Urolithiasis. 2017 Dec;45(6):585-589. doi: 10.1007/s00240-017-0966-1. Epub 2017 Feb 22.
PubMed 28229197Cheng F, Yu W, Zhang X, Yang S, Xia Y, Ruan Y. Minimally invasive tract in percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal stones. J Endourol. 2010 Oct;24(10):1579-82. doi: 10.1089/end.2009.0581.
PubMed 20839954Zhong W, Zeng G, Wu W, Chen W, Wu K. Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy with multiple mini tracts in a single session in treating staghorn calculi. Urol Res. 2011 Apr;39(2):117-22. doi: 10.1007/s00240-010-0308-z. Epub 2010 Sep 7.
PubMed 20821200Mishra S, Kurien A, Ganpule A, Muthu V, Sabnis R, Desai M. Percutaneous renal access training: content validation comparison between a live porcine and a virtual reality (VR) simulation model. BJU Int. 2010 Dec;106(11):1753-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09753.x. Epub 2010 Oct 15.
PubMed 20950308Wu C, Hua LX, Zhang JZ, Zhou XR, Zhong W, Ni HD. Comparison of renal pelvic pressure and postoperative fever incidence between standard- and mini-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2017 Jan;33(1):36-43. doi: 10.1016/j.kjms.2016.10.012. Epub 2016 Dec 22.
PubMed 28088272Karami H, Gholamrezaie HR. Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy in selected patients. J Endourol. 2004 Jun;18(5):475-6. doi: 10.1089/0892779041271580.
PubMed 15253824Alsyouf M, Abourbih S, West B, Hodgson H, Baldwin DD. Elevated Renal Pelvic Pressures during Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Risk Higher Postoperative Pain and Longer Hospital Stay. J Urol. 2018 Jan;199(1):193-199. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.08.039. Epub 2017 Aug 12.
PubMed 28807646
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 Mar 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Randomized Controlled Trial to Compare the Operative Outcomes and Complications of Mini-percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (Mini-PCNL) Versus Standard PCNL
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04767919
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 191269
- Conditions
- Kidney Stone
- Keywords
- Nephrolithotomy Laser Percutaneous Kidney Stone
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 75 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, San DiegoUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Jan 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 7 Jun 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 7 Jun 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 23 Feb 2021 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The decision to use standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) versus mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MIP) has been a subject of much debate in the urological community. The investigators propose a randomized controlled trial to compare the operative outcomes and complications of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) versus standard PCNL for renal stones. The results of this study will help guide the decision making regarding these two procedures in the US population and provide further insight into the utility and safety of these procedures. A cost analysis will be performed, and it is hypothesized that the reusable components of the Storz MIP set will result in lower costs of the mini-PCNL procedure compared to standard PCNL.
Detailed description
Presurgical management will follow the standard of care and patients with active urinary tract infections will be treated prior to kidney stone surgery. After the informed consent process, the subject will be asked to complete the Wisconsin Stone Quality of Life Index (WISQOL), an externally validated and internally consistent questionnaire designed specifically for kidney stones patients. All patients should receive a computerized tomography (CT) scan prior to their procedure as standard of care for assessment of stone burden and access planning. This preoperative imaging will be assessed and scored using the standardized STONE scoring system, which has been validated for predicting treatment success and perioperative complications following PCNL.
Prior to their procedure patients will be randomized to receive one of the two interventions outlined above, only study subjects will be blinded to the randomization. Randomization will be conducted centrally for each site to ensure balance of PCNL and mini-PCNL using the CCF-Redcap randomization module to ensure proper randomization between sites. Randomization can occur at any time after enrollment prior to surgery. Study subjects will be selected from a patient pool where PCNL or mini-PCNL would be considered equally viable alternative Standard of Care procedures for treatment of kidney stone disease, with neither procedure presenting any benefit over the other. The randomization of procedure for this pool of study subjects was to guarantee that an equal number of both procedures were performed in the trial throughout all centers.
Patients choosing to participate in this research study will not be informed of which procedure they received to minimize any bias regarding postoperative pain and quality of life scores. No changes to the disclosure process will be made for any other variations or complications during their procedure outside of the research study interventions. Due to the time between the initial surgical procedure and postoperative follow-up visit there is a risk of unintentional unblinding by other providers involved with the care of study patients and access to their medical records. As such patients will be asked at the time of their follow-up visit if they remained blinded to their procedure type. Whenever possible patients should remain blinded but unblinding is not an exclusion criterion as the primary endpoint, change in hemoglobin, should not be affected by this knowledge.
A pre-operative complete blood count and basic metabolic panel will be obtained. Two endoscopic stone procedure types will be investigated in this study. The first, a standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (sPCNL)- performed using a 30 Fr access sheath following balloon dilation. The second, a mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL)- performed using an 18 Fr access sheath following either balloon dilation or dilation using a single step metal dilator. Both procedures will be performed under general anesthesia with the patient in prone position. Access technique (triangulation method, ultrasound guided, or endoscopically guided) will be at the discretion of the attending surgeon. Stone lithotripter type (pneumatic, ultrasonic, or laser) and retrieval method (basket, forceps) will similarly be at the discretion of the urologist. Placement of ureteral stents will be left up to the discretion of the surgeon. Placement of nephrostomy tubes will be recorded as a protocol deviation and the indication for placement recorded. Whenever possible a single access tract will be used for the procedure and if multiple access sites are required it will be recorded as a protocol deviation. Following completion of the procedure and closure of the access tract, pressure will be applied to the surgical site for one minute. Patients with plans for a staged bilateral PCNL should only be enrolled for their first operation and should complete the quality-of-life questionnaire and imaging requirements described below prior to their second procedure.
Renal pelvis pressure monitoring is not part of the standard of care and is included as an outcome for research purposes only. There is no additional risk to the patient when monitoring this pressure and patients will be informed of this during the informed consent process.
Using a flexible cystoscope, a 5 Fr open-ended ureteral catheter will be positioned in the ureteropelvic junction for recording renal pelvis pressures. Following placement, the catheter will be secured and attached to arterial line pressure transducer positioned at the level of the kidney and connected to an invasive blood pressure (IBP) port. The arterial line pressure transducer will be fixed to IV pole at the level of the kidney and adjusted during the case if the patient bed is repositioned during the case. Transducer tubing should be flushed with normal saline to remove any air and pressure should be zeroed without any pressure being applied to the surgical site. Pressure monitoring and zeroing should be established after obtaining access but prior to active stone fragmentation or extraction and continue until closure of the access tract.
Continuous data monitoring and recording will be achieved via attaching the IBP port either on a portable vital signs monitor or the main anesthesia monitoring system. Data points should be recorded continuously whenever possible. Data will be either extracted manually from the portable monitor or automatically through the anesthesia monitoring system. Analysis of these data points to determine the mean RPP, time above >30mmHg, and maximum RPP can be conducted at the individual sites and included as part of their data set transfer or deidentified data sets can be sent to CCF for analysis of those endpoints.
Post-operatively, patients will be admitted to the hospital and monitored per usual clinical procedure. A complete blood count will be obtained on postoperative day 0, preferably in recovery, and on postoperative day 1. A basic metabolic panel will also be obtained prior to discharge. Further laboratory tests will be dictated by the patients' clinical status and length of stay. If patient length of stay exceeds one day the final complete blood count prior to discharge will also be recorded.
Along with their standard postoperative day 1 labs, an additional red topped tube (4-10ml) for IL-6 and procalcitonin will also be collected. This sample will need to be processed with several hours of collection using a centrifuge and the serum aliquots placed in cryovials prior to freezing. Individual research sites will be responsible for the lab draw, centrifuge process, freezing, and shipping of IL-6 and procalcitonin serum samples. These may be stored on site and shipped in bulk periodically or upon conclusion of patient enrollment per the preference of the study coordinator at each site. All these samples will be analyzed in bulk at the conclusion of the recruitment period.
Since higher irrigating pressures during PCNL have been linked to higher rates of the systemic inflammatory response (SIRS) this will also be included as a secondary endpoint. The criteria for SIRS will be defined as any two of the following conditions: heart rate >90 beats per minute, respiratory rate >20 respirations per minute, serum white blood cell count greater than 12,000/high power field or less than 4,000/high power field and temperature >38.0 ⁰C or <36.0 ⁰C.
Postoperative complications will be classified using the Clavien-Dindo system which has been modified for use following percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Standard of care procedures will be followed for patients requiring postoperative blood transfusions. Postoperative pain management will be left up to the discretion of the attending surgeon. The patient will be discharged from the hospital per the usual clinical protocols with a planned clinic visit between 4 and 6 weeks after surgery. In the interval following surgery readmissions, ED visits, and reoperations for study patients should be recorded.
As part of the standard of care for PCNL patients, both a renal ultrasound and a kidney, ureter, and bladder x-ray study obtained between 4 and 6 weeks postoperatively. Imaging will be reviewed by a blinded radiologist for assessment of stone free rate, defined as no visible stone fragments on either imaging set. Any discrepancies between ultrasound and x-ray modalities will be resolved with a follow-up CT scan.
If a patient receives a postoperative CT scan for another indication, this scan will take the place of the KUB and U/S for determining stone free rate. Additional data points such as parenchymal thickness at target calyx will for also be assessed for swelling/fluid accumulation.
The WISQL questionnaire, the same administered following initial consent, will be given at the 4-6 week follow-up visit to track any differences in quality of life between the two procedures. The WISQOL questionnaire specifically asks for the patients to provide answer statements that reflect their quality of life over the past four weeks. For the purposes of the second instance of the questionnaire, study subjects will be instructed to answer with respect to their symptoms since their procedure, to encompass patients who may have their follow-up visit scheduled more than four weeks from their procedure date.
The timeline for study subject participation and the required tests is presented below.
Procedures Preoperative POD0 POD1 Weeks 4-6 Informed consent X CT Scan X WISQOL Survey X X CBC X X X BMP or CMP X X Randomization X Intraoperative RPP X Serum sample (IL-6 and PCT) X KUB and renal U/S X
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Subjects will be assigned to one of two Standard of Care treatments for kidney stone disease and complete their treatment using one treatment modality.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (sPCNL) | Active comparator | Procedure: Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (sPCNL)The first arm will consist of a Standard of Care standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (sPCNL)- performed using a 30 Fr access sheath following balloon dilation. |
| Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (MIP) | Active comparator | Procedure: Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (MIP)The second arm will consist of a Standard of Care mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL)- performed using an 18 Fr access sheath following either balloon dilation or dilation using a single step metal dilator. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (10 listed)
- Patients with planned PCNL and a preoperative CT scan
- Urologist obtained access and prone positioning during surgery
- Tract dilation performed either using balloon dilator or a single step mini-PCNL dilation
- Age: ≥18 years' old
- Stone size: 10-25mm
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Anticoagulated or history of coagulopathy (with the exception of daily 81 mg aspirin)
- Conversion to open procedure
- Multiple access tracts
- Inability to give informed consent or unable to meet requirements of the study for any reason
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (sPCNL)Endoscopic stone procedure using a laser placed in the kidney through an 30 Fr access sheath following balloon dilation. | Procedure or surgery | Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (sPCNL) |
| Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (MIP)Endoscopic stone procedure using a laser placed in the kidney through an 18 Fr access sheath following either balloon dilation or dilation using a single step metal dilator. | Procedure or surgery | Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (MIP) |
Primary outcome
Blood Loss
Time frame: Intraoperative period, up to 4 hours on average.
Blood loss during study operative procedure, up to 4 hours on average, as estimated by hemoglobin levels measured immediately after surgery.
17 secondary outcomes
Intraoperative Complication Rates
Time frame: Intraoperative period, up to 4 hours on average.
Renal Pressure
Time frame: Intraoperative period, up to 4 hours on average.
Operation Time
Time frame: Intraoperative period, up to 4 hours on average.
Anesthesia Time
Time frame: Intraoperative period, up to 4 hours on average.
Hospital Stay Time
Time frame: Postoperative period, 24 hours on average.
Pain Medication Dose
Time frame: Postoperative period, 24 hours on average.
Urine Output
Time frame: Postoperative period, 24 hours on average.
ED Visits
Time frame: Postoperative period, up to 6 weeks.
Readmission
Time frame: Postoperative period, up to 6 weeks.
Reoperation
Time frame: Postoperative period, up to 6 weeks.
Imaging
Time frame: Postoperative period, up to 6 weeks
Quality of Life Questionnnaire
Time frame: Postoperative period, up to 6 weeks.
IL-6 Results
Time frame: Postoperative period, up to 8 hours on average.
PCT Results
Time frame: Postoperative period, up to 8 hours on average.
Pain Intensity
Time frame: Postoperative period, up to 6 weeks.
Postoperative Complication Rates
Time frame: Postoperative period, up to 6 weeks.
Pain Medication Frequency
Time frame: [Time Frame: Postoperative period, 24 hours on average.]
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 27 Mar 2025.
- Background: PubMed 27238616Assimos D, Krambeck A, Miller NL, Monga M, Murad MH, Nelson CP, Pace KT, Pais VM Jr, Pearle MS, Preminger GM, Razvi H, Shah O, Matlaga BR. Surgical Management of Stones: American Urological Association/Endourological Society Guideline, PART I. J Urol. 2016 Oct;196(4):1153-60. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.05.090. Epub 2016 May 27.
- Background: PubMed 21575966Desai MR, Sharma R, Mishra S, Sabnis RB, Stief C, Bader M. Single-step percutaneous nephrolithotomy (microperc): the initial clinical report. J Urol. 2011 Jul;186(1):140-5. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.03.029. Epub 2011 May 14.
- Background: PubMed 26220396Zeng G, Wan S, Zhao Z, Zhu J, Tuerxun A, Song C, Zhong L, Liu M, Xu K, Li H, Jiang Z, Khadgi S, Pal SK, Liu J, Zhang G, Liu Y, Wu W, Chen W, Sarica K. Super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SMP): a new concept in technique and instrumentation. BJU Int. 2016 Apr;117(4):655-61. doi: 10.1111/bju.13242. Epub 2015 Aug 22.
- Background: PubMed 23841665Desai J, Solanki R. Ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMP): one more armamentarium. BJU Int. 2013 Nov;112(7):1046-9. doi: 10.1111/bju.12193. Epub 2013 Jul 11.
- Background: PubMed 9870281Jackman SV, Docimo SG, Cadeddu JA, Bishoff JT, Kavoussi LR, Jarrett TW. The "mini-perc" technique: a less invasive alternative to percutaneous nephrolithotomy. World J Urol. 1998;16(6):371-4. doi: 10.1007/s003450050083.
- Background: PubMed 16938385Giusti G, Piccinelli A, Taverna G, Benetti A, Pasini L, Corinti M, Teppa A, Zandegiacomo de Zorzi S, Graziotti P. Miniperc? No, thank you! Eur Urol. 2007 Mar;51(3):810-4; discussion 815. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.07.047. Epub 2006 Aug 11.
- Background: PubMed 24177788Xu S, Shi H, Zhu J, Wang Y, Cao Y, Li K, Wang Y, Sun Z, Xia S. A prospective comparative study of haemodynamic, electrolyte, and metabolic changes during percutaneous nephrolithotomy and minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy. World J Urol. 2014 Oct;32(5):1275-80. doi: 10.1007/s00345-013-1204-2. Epub 2013 Nov 1.
- Background: PubMed 29858913Guler A, Erbin A, Ucpinar B, Savun M, Sarilar O, Akbulut MF. Comparison of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the treatment of large kidney stones: a randomized prospective study. Urolithiasis. 2019 Jun;47(3):289-295. doi: 10.1007/s00240-018-1061-y. Epub 2018 Jun 1.
- Background: PubMed 28229197Sakr A, Salem E, Kamel M, Desoky E, Ragab A, Omran M, Fawzi A, Shahin A. Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs standard PCNL for management of renal stones in the flank-free modified supine position: single-center experience. Urolithiasis. 2017 Dec;45(6):585-589. doi: 10.1007/s00240-017-0966-1. Epub 2017 Feb 22.
- Background: PubMed 20839954Cheng F, Yu W, Zhang X, Yang S, Xia Y, Ruan Y. Minimally invasive tract in percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal stones. J Endourol. 2010 Oct;24(10):1579-82. doi: 10.1089/end.2009.0581.
- Background: PubMed 20821200Zhong W, Zeng G, Wu W, Chen W, Wu K. Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy with multiple mini tracts in a single session in treating staghorn calculi. Urol Res. 2011 Apr;39(2):117-22. doi: 10.1007/s00240-010-0308-z. Epub 2010 Sep 7.
- Background: PubMed 20950308Mishra S, Kurien A, Ganpule A, Muthu V, Sabnis R, Desai M. Percutaneous renal access training: content validation comparison between a live porcine and a virtual reality (VR) simulation model. BJU Int. 2010 Dec;106(11):1753-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09753.x. Epub 2010 Oct 15.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Kidney Stone
Not yet recruitingEarly Phase 1
Phosphate & Kidney Stones
Kidney Stones, Calcium Oxalate Kidney Stones
Recruiting
Trial of Ureteroscopy vs Steerable Continuous Flow Aspiration Technology
Urolithiasis, Stones, Kidney
Recruiting
Supervised Endoscopic Tele-controlled Intelligent Lithotripsy
Renal Stone
Active, not recruitingObservational study
A Retrospective, Multi-center Real-world Study of Steerable Ureteroscopic Renal Evacuation (SURE) Procedure With the CVAC® System
Urolithiasis, Kidney Stone
Not yet recruiting
Ureteral Access Strategies in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery
Nephrolithiasis, Kidney Calculi
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Manoj Monga, M.D. study chair
UCSD Medical Center, San Diego
6 sites in 2 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (sPCNL) and Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (MIP) in people with Kidney Stone, run by University of California, San Diego at 6 sites in 2 countries.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 10 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Mar 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 6 sites in United States, Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Blood Loss (time frame: Intraoperative period, up to 4 hours on average.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04767919, which also lists 25 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 27 Mar 2025.