Outcomes of the Surgical Stone Management in Pelvic Ectopic Kidneys: A Retrospective Comparison of Three Different Approaches

dc.authorid0009-0000-8052-5437
dc.authorid0000-0001-7175-713X
dc.contributor.authorBicaklioglu, Fatih
dc.contributor.authorMert, Mahmut Selman
dc.contributor.authorSobay, Resul
dc.contributor.authorArikan, Ozgur
dc.contributor.authorAydin, Mehmet Erhan
dc.contributor.authorUslu, Mehmet
dc.contributor.authorYildirim, Salih
dc.date.accessioned2025-11-16T19:34:48Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.departmentİstanbul Medeniyet Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractBackground/Objectives: This study evaluates and compares the surgical outcomes of open pyelolithotomy, laparoscopic pyelolithotomy, and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in the management of pelvic ectopic kidney stones. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 47 adult patients with pelvic ectopic kidney stones who underwent surgery between January 2009 and January 2024. Patients were categorized as open pyelolithotomy (n = 15), laparoscopic pyelolithotomy (n = 14), or RIRS (n = 18). Stone-free (SF) rates were assessed in the early postoperative period (1st or 2nd day), in the 1st month, and in the 3rd month. Demographic data, stone characteristics, operative data, and complications were recorded. Results: RIRS had significantly shorter operative and hospitalization times but a lower SF rate in the 3rd month (44.4%) compared to laparoscopy (92.9%) and open pyelolithotomy (86.7%). Additional procedures were required in 50% of RIRS cases to achieve SF status, while none were needed in the other groups. Complications included three Grade 2 cases (two bleeding; transient creatinine elevation) in open pyelolithotomy, two Grade 2 (urinary leakage; infection) and two Grade 3 cases (conversion to open surgery; trapped stent removal) in laparoscopic pyelolithotomy, and one Grade 2 case (febrile infection) in RIRS. Conclusions: Laparoscopic pyelolithotomy demonstrated the highest efficacy and comparable complication rates; making it the preferred approach for pelvic ectopic kidney stones. Open pyelolithotomy remains a valuable alternative where laparoscopic expertise or resources are limited. Although less invasive, RIRS showed lower efficacy due to the challenging anatomy of pelvic ectopic kidneys.
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/jcm14062081
dc.identifier.issn2077-0383
dc.identifier.issue6
dc.identifier.pmid40142889
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14062081
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14730/15449
dc.identifier.volume14
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001453181600001
dc.identifier.wosqualityN/A
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherMdpi
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Clinical Medicine
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.snmzKA_WOS_20250302
dc.subjectpelvic ectopic kidney
dc.subjectkidney stone
dc.subjectrenal ectopia
dc.subjectopen pyelolithotomy
dc.subjectlaparoscopic pyelolithotomy
dc.subjectretrograde intrarenal surgery
dc.titleOutcomes of the Surgical Stone Management in Pelvic Ectopic Kidneys: A Retrospective Comparison of Three Different Approaches
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar