{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,13]],"date-time":"2026-03-13T15:18:53Z","timestamp":1773415133077,"version":"3.50.1"},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"AVES YAYINCILIK A.\u015e.","issue":"6","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,13]],"date-time":"2026-03-13T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1773360000000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["URP"],"abstract":"<jats:p>Objective: Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) is the first-line treatment for kidney stones between 1 and 2 cm and can serve as an alternative to percutaneous nephrolithotomy for larger stones in high-risk patients, including those with bleeding disorders, obesity, renal congenital abnormalities, or solitary kidneys. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of supine mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) versus RIRS for the treatment of renal pelvic stones less than 2 cm.\r\nMethods: This prospective, randomized, double-blinded study included 50 patients aged &gt;18 years, of both sexes, with renal stones &lt;2 cm. Patients were randomized into 2 equal groups: Group A underwent supine mini-PCNL, while Group B underwent RIRS. Stone and patient characteristics, SFR, and perioperative events were compared between groups.\r\nResults: A total of 50 patients equally distributed into the 2 groups. Operative time was significantly lower in Group A than in Group B (P &lt; .05), while fluoroscopic time was significantly higher in Group A than in Group B (P &lt; .05). Also, hospital stay was significantly longer in Group A compared to Group B (P &lt; .001). SFR and retreatments were comparable between both groups. Complications were also similar, with no significant differences observed.\r\nConclusions: Supine mini-PCNL remains an effective option for achieving high stone clearance with a shorter operative time while avoiding ureteral access manipulation, while RIRS provides advantages such as reduced radiation exposure, shorter hospitalization but with a higher need for stenting and secondary procedures. Supine mini- PCNL is not inferior to RIRS in the treatment of less than 2 cm renal stones.\r\n\u00a0\r\nCite this article as: Abdelgawad AH, Elhawy MA, Hussein AAHF, Fathelbab TK, Tolba AKR, Fawzy AM. Retrograde intrarenal renal surgery versus supine mini percutaneous nephrolithotripsy in treatment of renal pelvic stones less than 2 cm, randomized clinical study. Urol Res Pract. 2025;51(6): 230-236.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.5152\/tud.2026.25121","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,13]],"date-time":"2026-03-13T11:35:56Z","timestamp":1773401756000},"page":"230-236","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Retrograde Intrarenal Renal Surgery versus Supine Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotripsy in Treatment of Renal Pelvic Stones Less than 2 cm, Randomized Clinical Study"],"prefix":"10.5152","volume":"51","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-0345-2312","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Ahmed Hakim","family":"Abdelgawad","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Mamdouh Abdelhamid","family":"Elhawy","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-0622-6556","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Al Ayman Hussein Fathy","family":"Hussein","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-9748-1602","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Tarek KH.","family":"Fathelbab","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0009-0007-9632-9634","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Amr Kamal Rabea","family":"Tolba","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-4919-7476","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Ahmed Mohamed","family":"Fawzy","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"3111","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,13]]},"container-title":["Urology Research and Practice"],"original-title":[],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,13]],"date-time":"2026-03-13T11:35:56Z","timestamp":1773401756000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/urologyresearchandpractice.org\/index.php\/pub\/article\/view\/3677"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,13]]},"references-count":0,"journal-issue":{"issue":"6","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,13]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.5152\/tud.2026.25121","relation":{},"ISSN":["2980-1478"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2980-1478","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,13]]}}}