Advances In Minimally Invasive Surgery For Urolithiasis A Comparative Analysis Of Techniques

Original Article

Abstract

Background: Urolithiasis describes the frequent urological condition where stones build up inside the urinary system. Minimally invasive surgery has changed urolithiasis treatment by reducing recovery time and complications while producing better results. The research shows patients receive varying benefits from each treatment method and more scientific study is needed to understand their true value.

Objectives: to determine how well four new treatment methods ESWL, URS, PCNL, and RIRS work for handling urolithiasis while evaluating patient outcomes and safety levels across various patient groups.

Study Design: A Prospective Comparative Study.

Duration and place of study. Department of Urology and Nephrology MTI Bacha Khan Medical College , Mardan from jan 2021 to jan 2022

Methods: 120 patients with kidney stones who received ESWL, URS, PCNL, or RIRS treatment. We divided patients into groups by looking at stone size and its location. We documented every patient's treatment results by measuring stone removal effectiveness, medical side effects, and their time to heal. We analyzed data using SD and p-values to maintain precise comparison methods. We studied the relationship between treatment outcomes and patient information together with the surgical techniques used P-value 0.5.

Results: Our analysis of 120 patients found ESWL removed 75% of stones up to 2 cm (SD ±10%, p<0.05) while URS and RIRS provided treatment success of 90% and 85% for stones under 1.5 cm ( PCNL delivered a 95% stone dissolution success rate when treating stones larger than 2cm. ESWL presented the fastest return to normal activities at 3 days plus or minus 1 day although PCNL patients needed 7 days plus or minus 2 days to recover completely. PCNL treatments led to most of the minor problems seen in 10% of all patient cases.

Conclusion: The use of reduced-incision stone removal techniques shows high success rates but the treatment outcome depends on both stone size and precise location. Healthcare teams select ESWL for small stones but turn to PCNL for treating bigger stones. RIRS and URS provide versatility and precision. To improve patient outcomes in treating urolithiasis we must focus on developing new technologies and creating individualized treatment methods.

Keywords: Minimally invasive, urolithiasis, surgical techniques, outcomes