Literature DB >> 15877828

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the treatment of renal pelvicalyceal stones in morbidly obese patients.

V A Mezentsev1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Management of urolithiasis in morbidly obese patients is usually associated with higher morbidity and mortality compared to non-obese patients. In morbidly obese patients, since the kidney and stone are at a considerable distance from the skin (compared to non-obese patients) difficulty may be found in positioning the patient so that the stone is situated at the focal point of the lithotripter.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcomes and cost-efficiency of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in the treatment of renal pelvicalyceal stones sized between 6 and 20 mm in morbidly obese patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using various aids, such as mobile overtable module, extended shock pathway and abdominal compression 37 patients with body mass index more than 40 kg/m2 were treated using the Siemens Lithostar-plus third generation lithotripter. The size of renal pelvicalyceal stones was between 6 and 20 mm. Treatment costs for shock wave lithotripsy were calculated.
RESULTS: The overall stone free rate at 3 months of 73% was achieved. The mean number of treatments per patient was 2.1. The post-lithotripsy secondary procedures rate was 5.4%. No complications, such as subcapsular haematoma or acute pyelonephritis were recorded. The most effective (87% success rate) and cost-efficient treatment was in the patients with pelvic stones. The treatment of the patients with low caliceal stones was effective in 60% only. The cost of the treatment of the patients with low calyceal stones was in 1.8 times higher than in the patients with pelvic stones.
CONCLUSION: We conclude that ESWL with the Siemens Lithostar-plus is the most effective and cost-efficient in morbidly obese patients with pelvic stones sized between 6 and 20 mm. 87% success rate was achieved. The increased distance from the skin surface to the stone in those patients does not decrease the success rate provided the stone is positioned in the focal point or within 3 cm of it on the extended shock pathway. ESWL should not be considered as the first line of treatment in the morbidly obese patients with low caliceal stones where the stone was positioned more than 1 cm from the focal point on the extended shock pathway.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15877828     DOI: 10.1590/s1677-55382005000200003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Braz J Urol        ISSN: 1677-5538            Impact factor:   1.541


  13 in total

1.  Obesity and Kidney Stone Procedures.

Authors:  Nikhi P Singh; Carter J Boyd; William Poore; Kyle Wood; Dean G Assimos
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2020

2.  [Effect of the body mass index on outcomes of ureterorenoscopy for renal stones].

Authors:  F Schott; S Knipper; A K Orywal; A J Gross; C Netsch
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 0.639

3.  Obesity might not be a disadvantage for SWL treatment in children with renal stone.

Authors:  Oktay Akça; Rahim Horuz; Mustafa Yücel Boz; Alper Kafkasli; Okan Gökhan; Cemal Göktaş; Kemal Sarica
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2013-01-09       Impact factor: 2.370

4.  Abdominal fat distribution on computed tomography predicts ureteric calculus fragmentation by shock wave lithotripsy.

Authors:  Hsu-Cheng Juan; Hung-Yu Lin; Yii-Her Chou; Yi-Hsin Yang; Paul Ming-Chen Shih; Shu-Mien Chuang; Jung-Tsung Shen; Yung-Shun Juan
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-03-14       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Feasibility and efficacy of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy using a new modified lateral position for the treatment of renal stones in obese patients.

Authors:  Anastasios Karatzas; Stavros Gravas; Vassilios Tzortzis; Evangelos Aravantinos; Ioannis Zachos; Nikolaos Kalogeras; Michael Melekos
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2011-08-17

6.  A low or high BMI is a risk factor for renal hematoma after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for kidney stones.

Authors:  Fabio Nussberger; Beat Roth; Tobias Metzger; Bernhard Kiss; George N Thalmann; Roland Seiler
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2016-08-30       Impact factor: 3.436

7.  Tensile, flexural and compressive strength studies on natural and artificial phosphate urinary stones.

Authors:  A Mohamed Ali; N Arunai Nambi Raj
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2008-11-06

8.  Body mass index, body fat percentage, and the effect of body fat mass on SWL success.

Authors:  Ali Ferruh Akay; Abdullah Gedik; Ali Tutus; Hayrettin Sahin; Mehmet Kamuran Bircan
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2007-03-16       Impact factor: 2.370

9.  Ultrasound Guidance to Assist Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Reduces Radiation Exposure in Obese Patients.

Authors:  Manint Usawachintachit; Selma Masic; Helena C Chang; Isabel E Allen; Thomas Chi
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2016-04-22       Impact factor: 2.649

10.  OBESITY: A DELICATE ISSUE CHOOSING THE ESWL TREATMENT FOR PATIENTS WITH KIDNEY AND URETERAL STONES?

Authors:  C Pricop; G D Radavoi; D Puia; C Vechiu; V Jinga
Journal:  Acta Endocrinol (Buchar)       Date:  2019 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 0.877

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.