Abbreviation of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: PCNL or PNL?

Dear Editor:

Since it was first described in 1976 by Fernström and Johansson, ¹ percutaneous stone surgery has had an important place in treating kidney stones, and it is commonly performed all over the world. There are thousands of studies in the literature on this issue, and new studies are constantly ongoing.

All authors and researchers know that a review of existing literature should be conducted before designing a new study. In general, we use keywords or abbreviations for this search. Also, using abbreviations is the one of the standard rules of writing an article. However, the abbreviation for this surgery, which has existed for nearly 40 years, is still not standardized. When a literature search was carried out on percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL), different abbreviations were found. For example, a PubMed search reveals 1251 results for the term “PCNL,” 1601 results for “PNL,” 20 article results containing both terms, and 2832 results when one uses the term “or” between these two abbreviations.

This situation is confusing for researchers, and it leads to complexity for those who want to learn about this procedure. Moreover, sometimes authors use both of these terms (PCNL and PNL) in the same article inconsistently. The most striking example can be seen in the EAU guidelines. At the beginning of the EAU guidelines on Urolithiasis 2016, the abbreviation for percutaneous nephrolithotomy is shown as PCNL, but in the rest of the text, PNL is used. ²

In addition, many different types of PNL surgeries have been described (standard, mini, micro, ultra mini, tubeless, etc.), which increases the complexity of describing the procedure. Tepeler and Sarica have suggested using a novel labeling system to overcome this problem. Under this system, PNL procedures would be labeled according to the size of the tract (PNL^+size), for example, PNL⁺²⁰, PNL⁺¹², and so on. ³ However, the idea of using this new abbreviation has not been widely accepted.

We all know how insistent the Journal of Endourology editors are about using “SWL” instead of “ESWL” for extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. Although the reason is different, we suggest caution for the use of an abbreviation of percutaneous nephrolithotomy similar to that of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. In addition to authors, journals' editorial teams should make an effort to use only one of these terms, “PCNL” or “PNL.” This will maintain order and simplify the language of new studies. We feel that the acronym “PNL” should be preferred because it contains fewer characters and is thus easier to type and read.