Literature DB >> 17263604

Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy for 5- to 10-mm stones in the proximal ureter: Prospective effectiveness patient-preference trial.

Steinar J Karlsen1, Julian Renkel, Abdul R Tahir, Anders Angelsen, Lien M Diep.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To establish the best treatment modality in our hospitals for patients with proximal-ureteral calculi 5 to 10 mm, we compared the treatment outcome in those who underwent primary ureteroscopy (URS) with that in patients who underwent primary in-situ SWL. The primary endpoints were stone-free rates at 3 weeks and 3 months and the subjective patient experience. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was a prospective patient-preference trial. From September 2002 to May 2005, 80 patients were included, of whom 71 could be evaluated. Thirty-three patients were treated with SWL and 38 with semirigid or flexible URS. Stone status was evaluated with excretory urography or noncontrast helical CT. The bother score of urinary-tract symptoms was recorded on a visual analog scale.
RESULTS: The stone-free rate at 3 weeks was 58% and 78% (P = 0.061) and at 3 months 88% and 89% (P = 1) for SWL and URS, respectively. The percentage of patients in need of analgesics was 30% and 49% (P = 0.118) at 3 weeks and 9% and 21% (P = 0.181) at 3 months for the SWL and the URS group, respectively. The bother score regarding dysuria, hematuria, and flank pain were statistically significant in favor of SWL.
CONCLUSION: Ureteroscopy tends to make patients stone free faster, but SWL is preferred by most patients because there is less discomfort after treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17263604     DOI: 10.1089/end.2006.0153

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


  13 in total

Review 1.  Arguments for choosing extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for removal of urinary tract stones.

Authors:  Hans-Göran Tiselius; Christian G Chaussy
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 3.436

2.  The comparison of laparoscopy, shock wave lithotripsy and retrograde intrarenal surgery for large proximal ureteral stones.

Authors:  M D Ufuk Ozturk; Nevzat Can Sener; H N Goksel Goktug; Adnan Gucuk; Ismail Nalbant; M Abdurrahim Imamoglu
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.862

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

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

4.  Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) value changes before and after shock wave lithotripsy.

Authors:  Matteo Vittori; Silvia Baroni; Pietro Manuel Ferraro; Giovanni Gambaro; Renato Morelli; PierFrancesco Bassi; Alessandro D'Addessi
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2016-10-27       Impact factor: 3.436

5.  Ureteral wall thickness at the impacted ureteral stone site: a critical predictor for success rates after SWL.

Authors:  Kemal Sarica; Alper Kafkasli; Özgür Yazici; Ali Cihangir Çetinel; Mehmet Kutlu Demirkol; Murat Tuncer; Cahit Şahin; Bilal Eryildirim
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2014-11-25       Impact factor: 3.436

6.  Effect of the body mass index on outcomes of flexible ureterorenoscopy.

Authors:  Erhan Sari; Abdulkadir Tepeler; Emrah Yuruk; Berkan Resorlu; Tolga Akman; Murat Binbay; Abdullah Armagan; Ali Unsal; Ahmet Yaser Muslumanoglu
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2013-07-23       Impact factor: 3.436

7.  Pretreatment with low-energy shock waves induces renal vasoconstriction during standard shock wave lithotripsy (SWL): a treatment protocol known to reduce SWL-induced renal injury.

Authors:  Rajash K Handa; Michael R Bailey; Marla Paun; Sujuan Gao; Bret A Connors; Lynn R Willis; Andrew P Evan
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2008-12-22       Impact factor: 5.588

8.  Management of impacted proximal ureteral stone: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy with holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy.

Authors:  Mostafa Khalil
Journal:  Urol Ann       Date:  2013-04

9.  Predictive factors for flexible ureterorenoscopy requirement after rigid ureterorenoscopy in cases with renal pelvic stones sized 1 to 2 cm.

Authors:  Evren Süer; Ömer Gülpinar; Cihat Özcan; Çağatay Göğüş; Seymur Kerimov; Mut Şafak
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2015-02-02

10.  Is semirigid ureteroscopy sufficient in the treatment of proximal ureteral stones? When is combined therapy with flexible ureteroscopy needed?

Authors:  Sadi Turkan; Ozan Ekmekcioglu; Lokman Irkilata; Mustafa Aydin
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2016-01-13
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.