Topaloğlu, HikmetKarakoyunlu, Ahmet NihatSarı, SercanÖzok, Hakkı UğurSağnak, LeventErsoy, Hamit2019-05-132019-05-132014Topaloğlu, H., Karakoyunlu, N., Sarı, S., Özok, H. U., Sağnak, L., Ersoy, H. (2014). A comparison of antegrade percutaneous and laparoscopic approaches in the treatment of proximal ureteral stones. BioMed Research International, 2014.2314-6133https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/691946https://hdl.handle.net/11491/1892Purpose. To compare the effectiveness and safety of retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (RLU) and percutaneous antegrade ureteroscopy (PAU) in which we use semirigid ureteroscopy in the treatment of proximal ureteral stones. Methods. Fifty-eight patients with large, impacted stones who had a history of failed shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) and, retrograde ureterorenoscopy (URS) were included in the study between April 2007 and April 2014. Thirty-seven PAU and twenty-one RLU procedures were applied. Stone-free rates, operation times, duration of hospital stay, and follow-up duration were analyzed. Results. Overall stone-free rate was 100% for both groups. There was no significant difference between both groups with respect to postoperative duration of hospital stay and urinary leakage of more than 2 days. PAU group had a greater amount of blood loss (mean hemoglobin drops for PAU group and RLU group were 1.6 ± 1.1 g/dL versus 0.5 ± 0.3 g/dL, resp.; P=0.022). RLU group had longer operation time (for PAU group and RLU group 80.1 ± 44.6 min versus 102.1 ± 45.5 min, resp.; P=0.039). Conclusions. Both PAU and RLU appear to be comparable in the treatment of proximal ureteral stones when the history is notable for a failed retrograde approach or SWL. The decision should be based on surgical expertise and availability of surgical equipment. © 2014 Hikmet Topaloglu et al.enAttribution 3.0 Unported (CC BY 3.0)info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess[Belirlenecek]Article201410.1155/2014/691946N/AQ1