Literature DB >> 11223679

Treatment of renal stones by extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: an update.

J J Rassweiler1, C Renner, C Chaussy, S Thüroff.   

Abstract

AIM: Despite the extensive experience with minimal invasive stone therapy, there are still different views on the ideal management of renal stones.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Analysis of the literature includes more than 14,000 patients. We have compared these data with long-term results of two major stone centers in Germany. The results have been compared concerning the anatomical kidney situation, stone size, stone localization and observation time.
RESULTS: According to the importance of residual fragments following extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), we have to distinguish between clinically insignificant residual fragments and clinically significant residual fragments (CIRF). 24 months following ESWL stone passage occurs as a continuous process, and if there are no clinical symptoms, any endoscopic procedure should be considered as overtreatment. According to these results, stone-free rates of patients increase in longer follow-up periods. Newer ESWL technology has increased the percentage of CIRF.
CONCLUSION: We consider ESWL in most patients with renal calculi as first-line treatment, except in patients with renal calculi bigger than 30 mm in diameter.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11223679     DOI: 10.1159/000052435

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  28 in total

1.  Surgical approach to urolithiasis: the state of art.

Authors:  Riccardo Bartoletti; Tommaso Cai
Journal:  Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab       Date:  2008-05

Review 2.  Aspects on how extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy should be carried out in order to be maximally effective.

Authors:  Hans-Göran Tiselius; Christian G Chaussy
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2012-06-27

Review 3.  Arguments for choosing extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for removal of urinary tract stones.

Authors:  Hans-Göran Tiselius; Christian G Chaussy
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 3.436

4.  Medium-term follow-up of clinically insignificant residual fragments after minimal invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy: prognostic features and risk factors.

Authors:  Xin Li; Long He; Jianzhong Li; Zhongyang Duan; Zijian Gao; Long Liu
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-11-15

5.  [Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. Past, present and future].

Authors:  C Chaussy; T Bergsdorf; S Thüroff
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 0.639

6.  [Extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy induced ultrastructural changes to the renal parenchyma under aspirin use. Electron microscopic findings in the rat kidney].

Authors:  C Fischer; J Wöhrle; J Pastor; K Morgenroth; T Senge
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 7.  [The future of ESWL].

Authors:  K U Köhrmann; D Neisius; J Rassweiler
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 0.639

8.  [Stone treatment tomorrow and the day after].

Authors:  A Miernik; S Hein; F Adams; J Halbritter; M Schoenthaler
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 0.639

9.  Viability and biocompatibility of an adhesive system for intrarenal embedding and endoscopic removal of small residual fragments in minimally-invasive stone treatment in an in vivo pig model.

Authors:  Simon Hein; Dominik Stefan Schoeb; Ingo Grunwald; Katharina Richter; Jörg Haberstroh; Maximilian Seidl; Peter Bronsert; Ulrich Wetterauer; Martin Schoenthaler; Arkadiusz Miernik
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-01-24       Impact factor: 4.226

10.  [Outpatient extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Prospective evaluation of 2937 cases].

Authors:  P J Bastian; H-P Bastian
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 0.639

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.