Literature DB >> 11697396

Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for stones in abnormal urinary tracts: analysis of results and comparison with normal urinary tracts.

O Demirkesen1, O Yaycioglu, B Onal, M Kalkan, N Tansu, V Yalcin, A R Kural, V Solok.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We reviewed our experience with SWL for stones in abnormal urinary tracts and compared the results with those in normal urinary tracts. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study group was composed of 2566 renal units (RU) treated on the Siemens Lithostar lithotripter at our SWL unit whose treatment and follow-up at 10 to 12 weeks were completed. Sixty-eight RUs (2.7%) belonged to 52 patients who had congenital upper urinary tract abnormalities. Logistic regression analysis was performed to analyze the impact of age, stone size, location, and the type of abnormality on the outcome of the SWL in the abnormal RU. The student t-, chi-square, and Fisher's exact tests were used for the comparison of stone load, number of treatment sessions, catheter placement, and success rates of the patients with normal and abnormal RU. Results of long-term follow-up for available patients (38 RU; 56%) were also evaluated.
RESULTS: Age, stone load, stone location, and the type of abnormality did not have a statistically significant impact on the outcome of SWL for abnormal RU. The average stone load was 2.1 +/- 2.8 cm2 in the abnormal and 1.4 +/- 1.3 cm2 in the normal RU. Thus, the stone load was significantly higher in the abnormal RU (P < 0.05). In the abnormal group, 56% of the RU became stone free, 37% had nonobstructive and noninfectious clinically insignificant residual fragments < or = 4 mm (CIRF), and SWL failed in 7%. In the normal group, 78% of the RU became stone-free, 18.5% had CIRF, and SWL failed in 4%. There was no significant difference in the success rates in the groups if success was defined as stone free and CIRF together (P > 0.05). However, there was significant a difference when stone-free, CIRF, and failure rates were evaluated separately (P < 0.05). Recurrence, regrowth, and retreatment rates in abnormal RU were 50%, 37%, and 34%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the fragmentation rates were similar, clearance of the fragments was hampered in abnormal urinary tracts. Thus, especially for large stones, other endourologic treatment options should be considered. High recurrence and regrowth rates warrant careful monitoring and consideration for medical treatment during follow-up.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11697396     DOI: 10.1089/08927790152596235

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


  8 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Outcomes of retrograde flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy for stone disease in patients with anomalous kidneys.

Authors:  İbrahim Mesut Ugurlu; Tolga Akman; Murat Binbay; Erdem Tekinarslan; Özgür Yazıcı; Mehmet Fatih Akbulut; Faruk Özgör; Ahmet Yaser Müslümanoğlu
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2014-08-27       Impact factor: 3.436

3.  The safety and efficacy of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs. retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal lithiasis in pelvic ectopic kidney: an exploratory pilot study.

Authors:  Junfeng Wu; Jun Shen
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-04

4.  Management of Clinically Insignificant Residual Fragments following Shock Wave Lithotripsy.

Authors:  Elisa Cicerello; Franco Merlo; Luigi Maccatrozzo
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2012-05-31

Review 5.  How can and should we optimize extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy?

Authors:  Christian G Chaussy; Hans-Göran Tiselius
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2017-11-25       Impact factor: 3.436

Review 6.  Hybrid flexible ureteroscopy strategy in the management of renal stones - a narrative review.

Authors:  Bogdan Geavlete; Cristian Mareș; Răzvan Mulțescu; Dragoș Georgescu; Petrișor Geavlete
Journal:  J Med Life       Date:  2022-08

7.  Comparison of shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for treatment of stone disease in horseshoe kidney patients.

Authors:  Mehmet Ilker Gokce; Zafer Tokatli; Evren Suer; Parviz Hajiyev; Aykut Akinci; Baris Esen
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2016 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.541

Review 8.  Minimally invasive treatment of an ectopic kidney stone: a case report and literature review.

Authors:  Chenglu Wang; Lu Jin; Xinyang Zhao; Guobin Li; Boxin Xue
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2019-08-05       Impact factor: 1.671

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.