Literature DB >> 16463145

Management of lower pole renal calculi: shock wave lithotripsy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus flexible ureteroscopy.

Glenn M Preminger1.   

Abstract

Current ureteroscopic intracorporeal lithotripsy devices and stone retrieval technology allow for the treatment of calculi located throughout the intra-renal collecting system. Difficulty accessing lower pole calculi, especially when the holmium laser fiber is utilized, is often encountered. Herein we review our experience where lower pole renal calculi were ureteroscopically managed by holmium laser fragmentation, either in situ, or by first displacing the stone into a less dependent position with the aid of a nitinol stone retrieval device. Lower pole stones less than 20 mm can be primarily treated by ureteroscopic means in patients: that are obese; have a bleeding diathesis; with stones resistant to shockwave lithotripsy (SWL); with complicated intra-renal anatomy; or as a salvage procedure after failed SWL. Lower pole calculi are fragmented with a 200 microm holmium laser fiber via a 7.5 F flexible ureteroscope. For those patients where the laser fiber reduced ureteroscopic deflection, precluding re-entry into the lower pole calyx, a 1.9 F nitinol basket is used to displace the lower pole calculus into a more favorable position, thus allowing for easier fragmentation. A nitinol device passed into the lower pole, through the ureteroscope, for stone displacement cause only a minimal loss of deflection and no significant impact on irrigation. Eighty-five percent of patients were stone free by IVP or CT scan performed at 3 months. Ureteroscopic management of lower pole calculi is a reasonable alternative to SWL or percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) in patients with low volume stone disease. If the stone cannot be fragmented in situ, nitinol basket or grasper retrieval, through a fully deflected ureteroscope, allows for repositioning of the stone into a less dependant position, thus facilitating stone fragmentation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16463145     DOI: 10.1007/s00240-005-0020-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urol Res        ISSN: 0300-5623


  43 in total

1.  The impact of radiological anatomy in clearance of lower caliceal stones after shock wave lithotripsy.

Authors:  Mustafa Ozgür Tan; Lokman Irkilata; Ilker Sen; Metin Onaran; Bora Küpeli; Ustünol Karaoğlan; Ibrahim Bozkirli
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2007-04-20

2.  Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the treatment of lower pole renal calculi.

Authors:  Reem Al-Bareeq; John D Denstedt
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 3.  [Lower pole calyceal stones].

Authors:  U Nagele; T Knoll; D Schilling; M S Michel; A Stenzl
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 0.639

4.  [Minimally invasive PCNL (mini-perc). Alternative treatment modality or replacement of conventional PCNL?].

Authors:  S Lahme; V Zimmermanns; A Hochmuth; V Janitzki
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 0.639

5.  A comparative study to analyze the efficacy and safety of flexible ureteroscopy combined with holmium laser lithotripsy for residual calculi after percutaneous nephrolithotripsy.

Authors:  Gang Xu; Jiaming Wen; Zhongyi Li; Zhewei Zhang; Xiuqing Gong; Jimin Chen; Chuanjun Du
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-03-15

6.  Improved effectiveness and safety of flexible ureteroscopy for renal calculi (<2 cm): A retrospective study.

Authors:  Shuqiu Chen; Bin Xu; Ning Liu; Hua Jiang; Xiaowen Zhang; Yu Yang; Jing Liu; Guozhu Sha; Weidong Zhu; Ming Chen
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2015 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 7.  To Dust or Not To Dust: a Systematic Review of Ureteroscopic Laser Lithotripsy Techniques.

Authors:  Javier E Santiago; Adam B Hollander; Samit D Soni; Richard E Link; Wesley A Mayer
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.092

8.  Efficacy of the lithotripsy in treating lower pole renal stones.

Authors:  Helen Cui; Eeke Thomee; Jeremy G Noble; John M Reynard; Benjamin W Turney
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2013-03-03       Impact factor: 3.436

9.  Optimal Management of Lower Polar Calyceal Stone 15 to 20 mm.

Authors:  Naveed Haroon; Syed M Nazim; M Hammad Ather
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2013-04-16

10.  Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of lower-pole renal stones with a diameter of smaller than 15 mm.

Authors:  Mustafa Kirac; Ömer Faruk Bozkurt; Lutfi Tunc; Cagri Guneri; Ali Unsal; Hasan Biri
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2013-03-13       Impact factor: 3.436

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.