Renal stones are one of the most common diseases in urology, with an almost 50% recurrence rate (
1) Therefore, treatment options vary widely, ranging from non-invasive and minimally invasive methods to open nephrolithotomy (
2,
3). Each modality comes with different conditions and outcomes (
2,
3,
6).
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy is one of the most common treatment modalities for large renal stones, offering high stone-free rates (
3). However, PCNL and C-arm instruments may not be readily available in developing countries and require a highly skilled operator to manage the risk of internal bleeding (
2). Open nephrolithotomy, while effective, may result in longer hospital stays and higher postoperative pain rates (
10).
A meta-analysis reported that laparoscopic surgery for evacuating renal stones might offer similar benefits to PCNL (
6). Thus, it is often suggested as an alternative to PCNL. However, laparoscopic nephrolithotomy is not routinely performed due to difficulties in managing bleeding from a laparoscopic view (
2,
9). A previous case report described laparoscopic nephrolithotomy on patients with staghorn stones (
7), but the technique used did not involve an incision in the Brodel’s line area and did not utilize a hypotension technique.
A patient presented with a 3-centimeter renal stone and a thick kidney parenchyma. As PCNL and C-arm instruments were not widely available across the country, we proposed performing laparoscopic nephrolithotomy to achieve better postoperative outcomes and shorter hospitalization compared to open nephrolithotomy.
A small incision on the kidney parenchyma using a hook was made to achieve better kidney function after surgery. A hypotension technique during the incision was used by the anesthesia team to reduce intraoperative bleeding. A total of 300 cc of blood loss was recorded during this operation. A meta-analysis of PCNL and open nephrolithotomy showed that average intra-operative blood loss might reach 500 milliliters per surgery. Although laparoscopic nephrolithotomy has a risk of excessive bleeding during the operation, our study showed that precise coordination between the operator and anesthesia team could result in better control of intraoperative bleeding.
Using only three trocars at the laparoscopic site, our study demonstrated that fewer trocars lead to better postoperative pain outcomes. A previous report indicated that most laparoscopic nephrolithotomies use five trocars to provide operator flexibility (
11). However, our study showed that even with fewer trocars, a better postoperative and intraoperative outcome is still achievable.
Moreover, our laparoscopic nephrolithotomy also offers a shorter operation time, which may help prevent the patient from acute kidney injury (AKI) (
12). A meta-analysis of PCNL reported an average operation time of 180 minutes, while our study only took 120 minutes(
4). Previous reports also indicated that laparoscopic nephrolithotomy typically lasts around 100 - 120 minutes (
13). These findings suggest that laparoscopic nephrolithotomy may offer better renal function and protection.
Finally, we believe that minimally invasive surgery using laparoscopy is the future for nephrolithotomy. It is more widely available compared to PCNL and offers better outcomes. Future studies should investigate all aspects of the advantages of using laparoscopic nephrolithotomy compared to other modalities.
3.1. Conclusions
Laparoscopic nephrolithotomy is safe and effective for removing renal stones with thick renal parenchyma, with no intraoperative or postoperative complications. Laparoscopic nephrolithotomy may be an alternative to PCNL and open nephrolithotomy when these options are not available.