Literature DB >> 10360493

Piezoelectric lithotripsy of ureteral stones: influence of shockwave frequency on sedation and therapeutic efficiency.

M Robert1, E Rakotomalala, O Delbos, H Navratil.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this randomized study was to assess the relation between shockwave frequency, sedation, and efficiency in piezoelectric extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) for ureteral calculi.
METHODS: A random sample of 114 patients aged between 15 and 74 (mean 45) years were treated at the shockwave frequencies of 1 (N = 57) or 4 (N = 57) per second using the EDAP LT 02 lithotripter at maximum energy. The stones' largest diameter ranged from 5 to 18 mm (mean 7.6 mm). Lower ureteral stones were treated with the patient in the prone position and upper ureteral stones in supine position. The duration of SWL sessions and stone measurements were statistically similar for patients treated at low and high frequencies. The levels of required sedation (none, intramuscular analgesia, intravenous sedation-analgesia) and stone-free rates after one session were analyzed by Student's t-test or Fisher's exact test.
RESULTS: Sedation did not differ statistically with SWL frequency for mid and lower ureteral calculi. However, the use of intravenous sedation-analgesia was less common for patients with upper ureteral stones treated at low rather than high frequency (19% and 100%, respectively; P < 0.0001). The success rate was significantly lower (P = 0.04) for lower ureteral calculi treated at low v high frequency (65 % and 89%, respectively) but was not statistically affected by frequency for upper ureteral stones.
CONCLUSION: We recommend high frequency for piezoelectric SWL of lower ureteral calculi, especially for stones with a maximum diameter > or =8 mm. On the other hand, low-frequency SWL appears to be suitable for the treatment of upper ureteral stones.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10360493     DOI: 10.1089/end.1999.13.157

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endourol        ISSN: 0892-7790            Impact factor:   2.942


  6 in total

1.  Comparison of treatment outcomes according to output voltage during shockwave lithotripsy for ureteral calculi: a prospective randomized multicenter study.

Authors:  Jinsung Park; Hong-Wook Kim; Sungwoo Hong; Hee Jo Yang; Hong Chung
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-11-12       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Extremely slow, half-number shockwave lithotripsy for ureteral stones.

Authors:  Shinya Somiya; Shigeki Koterazawa; Katsuhiro Ito; Takao Haitani; Hitoshi Yamada; Toru Kanno
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2022-08-15       Impact factor: 2.861

3.  Optimizing shock wave lithotripsy: a comprehensive review.

Authors:  Paul D McClain; Jessica N Lange; Dean G Assimos
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2013

4.  Which frequency is better for pediatric shock wave lithotripsy? Intermediate or low: a prospective randomized study.

Authors:  Onur Kaygisiz; Mehmet Cagatay Cicek; Ahmet Mert; Selcan Akesen; Emre Sarandol; Hakan Kilicarslan
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-04-22       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  Extremely-slow, half-number shockwave lithotripsy for asymptomatic renal stones <20 mm.

Authors:  Katsuhiro Ito; Toshifumi Takahashi; Toru Kanno; Takashi Okada; Yoshihito Higashi; Hitoshi Yamada
Journal:  Investig Clin Urol       Date:  2020-12-03

Review 6.  Comparison of High, Intermediate, and Low Frequency Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Urinary Tract Stone Disease: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Dong Hyuk Kang; Kang Su Cho; Won Sik Ham; Hyungmin Lee; Jong Kyou Kwon; Young Deuk Choi; Joo Yong Lee
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-07-07       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.