Literature DB >> 17453184

Clinical outcome of ureteroscopic lithotripsy for 2,129 patients with ureteral stones.

Toshifumi Kurahashi1, Hideaki Miyake, Nobutoshi Oka, Masashi Shinozaki, Atsushi Takenaka, Isao Hara, Masato Fujisawa.   

Abstract

The objective of this study was to retrospectively analyze the clinical outcomes of ureteroscopic lithotripsy (USL) performed in patients with ureteral stones, and to investigate the factors associated with therapeutic outcomes. This study included a total of 2,129 patients with ureteral stones who underwent USL between December 1985 and March 2006 in a single institution in Japan. In this series, ultrasonic lithotripsy was primarily performed, and forceps and/or baskets were occasionally used for the removal of stones. Complete removal was defined as total clearance 1 day after the initial USL. The initial stone-free rate following a single treatment with USL was 73.3%. Of 569 patients diagnosed as having fragmentation of residual stones, additional therapy was not performed for 115 with stones likely to pass spontaneously, while the remaining 454 subsequently underwent extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Thereafter, ureterolithotomy or percutaneous nephrolithotripsy was further added in 14. Ureteral perforation occurred in 14 patients, of whom 2 underwent nephrectomy; however, there were no other serious complications that could not be managed by conservative treatment. Whether ureteral stones were completely removed by an initial USL was significantly associated with the history of ureteral stone, severity of clinical symptoms, number of stones, localization of stones and maximal diameter of stones. Furthermore, multivariate analysis identified the severity of clinical symptoms, number of stones, localization of stones and maximal diameter of stones as independent predictors for complete removal of ureteral stones by the initial USL application. These findings suggest that USL could be a safe and effective treatment option for ureteral stones; however, other therapeutic strategies should also be considered in patients with currently identified risk factors associated with treatment failure following a single USL procedure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17453184     DOI: 10.1007/s00240-007-0095-3

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


  12 in total

1.  Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy for distal ureteral calculi: a prospective randomized study.

Authors:  R Peschel; G Janetschek; G Bartsch
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 2.  Extracorporeal lithotripsy. Update on technology.

Authors:  G K Chow; S B Streem
Journal:  Urol Clin North Am       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 2.241

Review 3.  Update on shock wave lithotripsy technology.

Authors:  Brian K Auge; Glenn M Preminger
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 2.309

4.  Two-year experience with ureteral stones: extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy v ureteroscopic manipulation.

Authors:  H Park; M Park; T Park
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 2.942

5.  Holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy for upper urinary tract calculi in 598 patients.

Authors:  Mario Sofer; James D Watterson; Timothy A Wollin; Linda Nott; Hassan Razvi; John D Denstedt
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Prospective, randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi 1 cm or less.

Authors:  Margaret S Pearle; James E Lingeman; Raymond Leveillee; Ramsay Kuo; Glenn M Preminger; Robert B Nadler; Joseph Macaluso; Manoj Monga; Udaya Kumar; John Dushinski; David M Albala; J Stuart Wolf; Dean Assimos; Michael Fabrizio; Larry C Munch; Stephen Y Nakada; Brian Auge; John Honey; Kenneth Ogan; John Pattaras; Elspeth M McDougall; Timothy D Averch; Thomas Turk; Paul Pietrow; Stephanie Watkins
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Comparison of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy in the treatment of ureteral calculi: a prospective study.

Authors:  W L Strohmaier; G Schubert; T Rosenkranz; A Weigl
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 8.  Ureteral ultrasonic lithotripsy revisited: a neglected tool?

Authors:  Uri Gur; David A Lifshitz; Dov Lask; Pinhas M Livne
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 2.942

9.  Treatment of ureteral stones: comparison of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and endourologic alternatives.

Authors:  B Küpeli; H Biri; K Isen; M Onaran; T Alkibay; U Karaoğlan; I Bozkirli
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 20.096

10.  Comparison between extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and semirigid ureterorenoscope with holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy for treating large proximal ureteral stones.

Authors:  Ching-Fang Wu; Jia-Jen Shee; Wei-Yu Lin; Chun-Liang Lin; Chih-Shou Chen
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 7.450

View more
  5 in total

1.  Impact of gender on success and complication rates after ureteroscopy.

Authors:  M Özsoy; Ö Acar; K Sarica; Z Saratlija-Novakovic; H Fajkovic; D Librenjak; T Esen; N Scheffbuch; C Seitz
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-11-12       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Management of upper ureteral stones exceeding 15 mm in diameter: Shock wave lithotripsy versus semirigid ureteroscopy with holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser lithotripsy.

Authors:  Hamdy Aboutaleb; Mohamed Omar; Shady Salem; Mohamed Elshazly
Journal:  SAGE Open Med       Date:  2016-12-20

3.  External Validation of the S.T.O.N.E. Score in Predicting Stone-Free Status After Rigid Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy.

Authors:  Noppavut Sirirak; Premsant Sangkum; Yada Phengsalae; Wisoot Kongchareonsombat; Charoen Leenanupunth; Wattanachai Ratanapornsompong; Chinnakhet Ketsuwan
Journal:  Res Rep Urol       Date:  2021-03-23

4.  Ureteroscopic lithotripsy using Swiss Lithoclast for treatment of ureteral calculi: 12-years experience.

Authors:  Young Kwon Hong; Dong Soo Park
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2009-07-30       Impact factor: 2.153

5.  Comparison of ESWL and ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy in management of ureteral stones.

Authors:  Yon Cui; Wenzhou Cao; Hua Shen; Jianjun Xie; Tamara S Adams; Yuanyuan Zhang; Qiang Shao
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-03       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.