Romero V, Akpinar H, Assimos DG (2010) Kidney stones: a global picture of prevalence, incidence, and associated risk factors. Rev Urol 12(2–3):e86-96

PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Tuerk C, Knoll T, Petrik A et al (2015) Guidelines on urolithiasis. European Urological Association Web site. Available at: http://uroweb.org/wp-content/uploads/22-Urolithiasis_LR.pdf.

Li X, He Z, Wu K et al (2009) Chinese minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy: the Guangzhou experience. J Endourol 23(10):1693–1697

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Ghani KR, Sammon JD, Bhojani N et al (2013) Trends in percutaneous nephrolithotomy use and outcomes in the United States. J Urol 190(2):558–564

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Erkoc M, Bozkurt M (2021) Comparison of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal pelvic stones of 2–3 cm. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 31(6):605–609

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Resorlu B, Unsal A, Ziypak T et al (2013) Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery, shockwave lithotripsy, and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treatment of medium-sized radiolucent renal stones. World J Urol 31(6):1581–1586

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Akman T, Binbay M, Ozgor F et al (2012) Comparison of percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde flexible nephrolithotripsy for the management of 2–4 cm stones: a matched-pair analysis. BJU Int 109(9):1384–1389

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Doizi S (2021) Intrarenal pressure: what is acceptable for flexible ureteroscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy? Eur Urol Focus 7(1):31–33

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Guven S, Yigit P, Tuncel A et al (2021) Retrograde intrarenal surgery of renal stones: a critical multi-aspect evaluation of the outcomes by the Turkish Academy of Urology Prospective Study Group (ACUP Study). World J Urol 39(2):549–554

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Tokas T, Herrmann T, Skolarikos A et al (2019) Pressure matters: intrarenal pressures during normal and pathological conditions, and impact of increased values to renal physiology. World J Urol 37(1):125–131

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Brain E, Geraghty RM, Lovegrove CE et al (2021) Natural history of post-treatment kidney stone fragments: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Urol 206(3):526–538

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Wu ZH, Wang YZ, Liu TZ et al (2022) Comparison of vacuum suction ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy and traditional ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy for impacted upper ureteral stones. World J Urol 40(9):2347–2352

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Lai D, He Y, Li X et al (2020) RIRS with vacuum-assisted ureteral access sheath versus MPCNL for the treatment of 2–4 cm renal stone. Biomed Res Int 2020:8052013

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Chen Y, Li C, Gao L et al (2022) Novel flexible vacuum-assisted ureteral access sheath can actively control intrarenal pressure and obtain a complete stone-free status. J Endourol 36(9):1143–1148

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Tiselius HG, Andersson A (2003) Stone burden in an average Swedish population of stone formers requiring active stone removal: how can the stone size be estimated in the clinical routine? Eur Urol 43(3):275–281

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Dauw CA, Simeon L, Alruwaily AF et al (2015) Contemporary practice patterns of flexible ureteroscopy for treating renal stones: results of a worldwide survey. J Endourol 29(11):1221–1230

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Tao RZ, Tang QL, Zhou S et al (2020) External physical vibration lithecbole facilitating the expulsion of upper ureteric stones 1.0–2.0 cm after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: a prospective randomized trial. Urolithiasis 48(1):71–77

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Yang J, Tao RZ, Lu P et al (2018) Efficacy analysis of self-help position therapy after holmium laser lithotripsy via flexible ureteroscopy. BMC Urol 18(1):33

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Labate G, Modi P, Timoney A et al (2011) The percutaneous nephrolithotomy global study: classification of complications. J Endourol 25(8):1275–1280

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Desai J, Zeng G, Zhao Z et al (2013) A novel technique of ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy: introduction and an initial experience for treatment of upper urinary calculi less than 2 cm. Biomed Res Int 2013:490793

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Hamamoto S, Yasui T, Okada A et al (2014) Endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery for large calculi: simultaneous use of flexible ureteroscopy and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy overcomes the disadvantageous of percutaneous nephrolithotomy monotherapy. J Endourol 28(1):28–33

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Karakoyunlu AN, Cakici MC, Sari S et al (2019) Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery and percutaneous nephrolithotomy methods for management of big- sized Kidney stones(≥ 4 cm): single center retrospective study. Urol J 16(3):232–235

PubMed  Google Scholar 

Zhu Z, Cui Y, Zeng F et al (2019) Comparison of suctioning and traditional ureteral access sheath during flexible ureteroscopy in the treatment of renal stones. World J Urol 37(5):921–929

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Oratis AT, Subasic JJ, Hernandez N et al (2018) A simple fluid dynamic model of renal pelvis pressures during ureteroscopic kidney stone treatment. PLoS One 13(11):e0208209

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Pearle MS, Lingeman JE, Leveillee R et al (2008) Prospective randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi 1 cm or less. J Urol 179(5 Suppl):S69-73

PubMed  Google Scholar 

Berardinelli F, De Francesco P, Marchioni M (2016) Infective complications after retrograde intrarenal surgery: a new standardized classification system. Int Urol Nephrol 48(11):1757–1762

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar