Literature DB >> 17253576

Extra-corporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus ureteroscopic management for ureteric calculi.

G Nabi1, P Downey, F Keeley, G Watson, S McClinton.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Ureteral stones frequently cause renal colic and if left untreated can cause obstructive uropathy. Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) and ureteroscopy, with or without intracorporeal lithotripsy, are the two most commonly offered interventional procedures in these patients. ESWL treatment is less invasive but has some limitations such as a high retreatment rate and lack of availability in many centres. Advances in ureteroscopy over the past decade have increased the success rate and reduced complication rates.
OBJECTIVES: To examine evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the outcomes of ESWL or ureteroscopy in the treatment of ureteric calculi. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL in The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2006), MEDLINE (1966 - March 2006), EMBASE (1980 - March 2006), reference lists of articles and abstracts from conference proceedings without language restriction. SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs comparing ESWL with ureteroscopic retrieval of ureteric stones were included. Participants were adults with ureteric stones requiring intervention. Published and unpublished sources were considered. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using the random effects model and the results expressed as relative risk (RR) for dichotomous outcomes or weighted mean difference (MD) for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN
RESULTS: Six RCTs (833 patients) were included. The stone-free rates were lower in the ESWL group (RR 0.84 95% CI 0.73 to 0.96). The retreatment rates were lower but not significant in the ureteroscopy group (RR 3.34 95% CI 0.82 to 13.62). The rate of complications was lower in the ESWL group (RR 0.48 95% CI 0.26 to 0.91). Length of hospital stay was less for ESWL treatment (MD -2.10 95% CI -2.55 to -1.64). AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: Ureteroscopic removal of ureteral stones achieves a higher stone-free state but with a higher complication rate and a longer hospital stay.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17253576     DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006029.pub2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  17 in total

Review 1.  [Modern urinary stone therapy: is the era of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy at an end?].

Authors:  A Miernik; K Wilhelm; P Ardelt; S Bulla; M Schoenthaler
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  The management of ureteric stones.

Authors:  S Phipps; D A Tolley; J G Young; F X Keeley
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 1.891

Review 3.  Treatment of ureteral and renal stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

Authors:  Brian R Matlaga; Jeroen P Jansen; Lisa M Meckley; Thomas W Byrne; James E Lingeman
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-05-15       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Efficacy and safety of the Accordion stone-trapping device: in vitro results from an artificial ureterolithotripsy model.

Authors:  Peter Jochen Olbert; Christian Keil; Jost Weber; Andres J Schrader; Axel Hegele; Rainer Hofmann
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2009-11-27

5.  Comparison of the clinical efficacy and safety of retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy and ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy in the treatment of obstructive upper ureteral calculi with concurrent urinary tract infections.

Authors:  Jun-Tao Jiang; Wei-Guo Li; Yi-Ping Zhu; Wen-Lan Sun; Wei Zhao; Yuan Ruan; Chen Zhong; Kristofer Wood; Hai-Bin Wei; Shu-Jie Xia; Xiao-Wen Sun
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2016-04-07       Impact factor: 3.161

Review 6.  Kidney stones.

Authors:  Ranan Dasgupta; Jonathan Glass; Jonathon Olsburgh
Journal:  BMJ Clin Evid       Date:  2009-04-21

7.  Factors influencing urologist treatment preference in surgical management of stone disease.

Authors:  M Adam Childs; Laureano J Rangel; James E Lingeman; Amy E Krambeck
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2012-01-13       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  Looking for lithotripsy: accessibility and portability of Canadian healthcare.

Authors:  Katrina L Piggott; Chaim M Bell
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2013-11

Review 9.  Herbal medicines in the management of urolithiasis: alternative or complementary?

Authors:  Veronika Butterweck; Saeed R Khan
Journal:  Planta Med       Date:  2009-05-14       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 10.  Ureteroscopy for the management of stone disease.

Authors:  Brian H Eisner; Michael P Kurtz; Stephen P Dretler
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 14.432

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.