MIP Versus PCNL for Kidney Stone Disease
Public ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT04767919. Field values are reproduced from the official study page; the official ClinicalTrials.gov record remains the source of truth for eligibility, enrollment, and contact information.
Data is sourced from official ClinicalTrials.gov public API records. Always review the official ClinicalTrials.gov record for the latest information.
Official title
Randomized Controlled Trial to Compare the Operative Outcomes and Complications of Mini-percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (Mini-PCNL) Versus Standard PCNL
Brief summary
Reproduced verbatim from the official ClinicalTrials.gov record. Not medical advice.
The decision to use standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) versus mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MIP) has been a subject of much debate in the urological community. The investigators propose a randomized controlled trial to compare the operative outcomes and complications of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) versus standard PCNL for renal stones. The results of this study will help guide the decision making regarding these two procedures in the US population and provide further insight into the utility and safety of these procedures. A cost analysis will be performed, and it is hypothesized that the reusable components of the Storz MIP set will result in lower costs of the mini-PCNL procedure compared to standard PCNL.
Study identification
- NCT ID
- NCT04767919
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Not applicable
- Enrollment
- 75 participants
Conditions and interventions
Conditions
Interventions
- Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (sPCNL) Procedure
- Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (MIP) Procedure
Procedure
Eligibility (public fields only)
- Age range
- 18 Years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Healthy volunteers not accepted
This page does not interpret eligibility. Detailed inclusion and exclusion criteria are on the official ClinicalTrials.gov record.
Study timeline
- Start date
- Dec 31, 2020
- Primary completion
- Jun 6, 2024
- Completion
- Jun 6, 2024
- Last update posted
- Mar 26, 2025
2021 – 2024
United States locations
- U.S. sites
- 5
- U.S. states
- 4
- U.S. cities
- 5
| Facility | City | State | ZIP | Site status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mayo Clinic | Phoenix | Arizona | 85054 | — |
| University of California, San Diego, Medical Center | San Diego | California | 92103 | — |
| Cleveland Clinic | Cleveland | Ohio | 44195 | — |
| Ohio State Unversity | Columbus | Ohio | 43210 | — |
| Vanderbilt University Medical Center | Nashville | Tennessee | 37232 | — |
Site contact phone numbers, emails, and investigator names are intentionally not displayed here. Open the official ClinicalTrials.gov record for site contact information.
Non-U.S. locations
This page focuses on the U.S. directory. The official record also lists 1 non-U.S. site.
About this trial record page
- What this page shows
- Public field values for ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT04767919, including study identification, conditions, interventions, eligibility (age, sex, healthy volunteer), timeline, and U.S. site list.
- What this page does not do
- No medical advice, eligibility judgments, treatment recommendations, study quality scoring, or AI-generated medical summaries. No site contact phone numbers, emails, or investigator names.
- Where the data comes from
- Sourced from the official ClinicalTrials.gov public API. The official record is the source of truth.
- Last refresh
- Last update posted Mar 26, 2025 · Synced Sep 2, 2026
Related: full search, browse by condition, browse by drug or therapy, browse by sponsor, browse by U.S. city.
Open the official record
The complete protocol, eligibility criteria, and contact information for NCT04767919 live on ClinicalTrials.gov.