Literature DB >> 19752621

Does ureteral stenting prior to shock wave lithotripsy influence the need for intervention in steinstrasse and related complications?

M H Ather1, B Shrestha, A Mehmood.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To analyze factors affecting steinstrasse (SS) and study the impact of pre-shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) stenting in the prevention of SS and related complications. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The cohort included 4,644 patients with renal stones treated by SWL. Three hundred and twenty-six (7%) developed SS. Initially, all patients were managed conservatively (group 1); interventions were reserved for those in whom conservative treatment failed (group 2). The 2 groups were further analyzed to identify factors influencing the need for intervention. The impact of pre-SWL stenting on the development of SS and the need for intervention was also assessed.
RESULTS: Expectant management was successful in 176 (54%) patients, while 150 (46%) required intervention for SS. The size of the stones had a significant association with the number of sessions required (p < 0.01) and the development of SS. The placement of a stent prior to SWL decreased neither the sessions of SWL (p < 0.01) nor the interventions required for SS and related complications.
CONCLUSIONS: SWL for larger stones is a potentially significant complication of SWL and is associated with significant morbidity. Ureteral stents decrease the acute presentations of patients with SS; however, it does not decrease the ultimate need for intervention in the management of SS. Copyright (c) 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19752621     DOI: 10.1159/000230028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urol Int        ISSN: 0042-1138            Impact factor:   2.089


  8 in total

Review 1.  Aspects on how extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy should be carried out in order to be maximally effective.

Authors:  Hans-Göran Tiselius; Christian G Chaussy
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2012-06-27

Review 2.  Physical therapy in the management of stone fragments: progress, status, and needs.

Authors:  Suoshi Jing; Qiongyan Gai; Xin Zhao; Juan Wang; Yuwen Gong; Yangyang Pang; Chen Peng; Yuejun Tian; Yuhan Wang; Zhiping Wang
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2017-06-07       Impact factor: 3.436

Review 3.  Acute management of stones: when to treat or not to treat?

Authors:  Helene Jung; Palle J S Osther
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-07-02       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  [Individualized evidence-based interventional stone treatment : One stone, many question marks?]

Authors:  T Bach; T Knoll
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 0.639

5.  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

6.  Can we predict the need for intervention in steinstrasse following shock wave lithotripsy?

Authors:  Chandan Phukan; T J Nirmal; Cornerstone V Wann; J Chandrasingh; Santosh Kumar; Nitin S Kekre; Antony Devasia
Journal:  Urol Ann       Date:  2017 Jan-Mar

7.  Case Report: An occurrence of steinstrasse in retrograde intra renal surgery (RIRS) for large staghorn kidney stone: a difficult experience in managing surgical outcomes.

Authors:  Ponco Birowo; Nur Rasyid; Widi Atmoko; Bobby Sutojo
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2020-03-12

Review 8.  Outcomes of ureteroscopy for patients with stones in a solitary kidney: evidence from a systematic review.

Authors:  Patrick Jones; Bhavan Prasad Rai; Bhaskar K Somani
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2016-01-25
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.