Literature DB >> 15893812

Therapeutic options for proximal ureter stone: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus semirigid ureterorenoscope with holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser lithotripsy.

Ching-Fang Wu1, Chih-Shou Chen, Wei-Yu Lin, Jia-Jen Shee, Chun-Liang Lin, Yu Chen, Wen-Shih Huang.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare the safety and cost-effectiveness of ureterorenoscopic holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (YAG) laser lithotripsy (URSL) with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for proximal ureteral stones.
METHODS: This investigation assessed 220 patients with upper ureteral stones. Those in the ESWL group were treated on an outpatient basis using the Medispec Econolith 2000 (Medispec, Germantown, MD) under intravenous sedation. URSL was performed with a 6/7.5F semirigid tapered ureterorenoscope and holmium:YAG laser under spinal anesthesia on an inpatient basis. A successful outcome was defined as the patient being stone free on radiography 1 month after treatment. The stone size, success rate, postoperative complications, and cost were evaluated in each group.
RESULTS: A total of 220 patients were enrolled in this study. Hematuria and flank pain were the most common complaints in each group. The mean stone burden +/- SD was 58.7 +/- 3.1 mm2 in the ESWL group and 108.4 +/- 10.0 mm2 in the URSL group (P = 0.000). The accessibility of the semirigid ureterorenoscope for upper ureteral stones was 98.1% (101 of 103), and the stone-free rate achieved after one treatment was 83.2% (84 of 101). The initial stone-free rate of in situ ESWL was 63.9% (76 of 119). Significantly, the initial stone-free rate of the URSL group was superior to that of the ESWL group (P = 0.001). The average cost in the URSL group appeared to be lower than that in the ESWL group (P = 0.000).
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study have demonstrated that URSL achieved excellent results for upper ureter calculi. In terms of cost and effectiveness, this procedure should be the first-line therapy for proximal ureter stones.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15893812     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2004.12.026

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  19 in total

1.  Comparison of two different running models for the shock wave lithotripsy machine in Taipei City Hospital: self-support versus outsourcing cooperation.

Authors:  Chi-Yi Huang; Shiou-Sheng Chen; Li-Kuei Chen
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2009-07-14

Review 2.  Preventing stone retropulsion during intracorporeal lithotripsy.

Authors:  Osama M Elashry; Ahmad M Tawfik
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2012-11-20       Impact factor: 14.432

3.  Treatment of large proximal ureteral stones: extra corporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus semi-rigid ureteroscope with lithoclast.

Authors:  Ehab R Tawfick
Journal:  Int Arch Med       Date:  2010-01-28

4.  The economics of stone disease.

Authors:  Noah E Canvasser; Peter Alken; Michael Lipkin; Stephen Y Nakada; Hiren S Sodha; Abdulkadir Tepeler; Yair Lotan
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2017-01-20       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 5.  Economic outcomes of treatment for ureteral and renal stones: a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Brian R Matlaga; Jeroen P Jansen; Lisa M Meckley; Thomas W Byrne; James E Lingeman
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-06-13       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Comparison of Patient Satisfaction with Treatment Outcomes between Ureteroscopy and Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Proximal Ureteral Stones.

Authors:  Jong-Hyun Lee; Seung Hyo Woo; Eun Tak Kim; Dae Kyung Kim; Jinsung Park
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2010-11-17

7.  Shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy for ureteral calculi: a prospective assessment of patient-reported outcomes.

Authors:  Jinsung Park; Dong Wook Shin; Jae Hoon Chung; Seung Wook Lee
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2012-10-18       Impact factor: 4.226

8.  Comparative study of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy outcomes for proximal and distal ureteric stones.

Authors:  Burak Turna; Kaan Akbay; Fatih Ekren; Oktay Nazli; Erdal Apaydin; Bülent Semerci; Gürhan Günaydin; Ibrahim Cüreklibatir
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2007-07-24       Impact factor: 2.370

9.  Ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy in patients with renal impairment.

Authors:  Ahmed S Safwat; Nabil K Bissada; Udaya Kumar; Mohamed I Taha; Fathy G Elanany; Ahmed M Eltaher; Medhat A Abdalla
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2007-08-07       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 10.  Economic Considerations in the Management of Nephrolithiasis.

Authors:  Daniel Roberson; Colin Sperling; Ankur Shah; Justin Ziemba
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2020-03-31       Impact factor: 3.092

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.