OBJECTIVES: To assess the need for pre-extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (pre-ESWL) stenting in management of impacted upper ureteral stones of size < or = 2 cm and to verify whether stenting would influence the success of therapy. METHODS:Between 2007 and 2008, a total of 60 patients with solitary, radio-opaque impacted upper ureteral stones measuring < or = 2 cm were divided into 2 equal groups: a stented group with a Double-J stent fixed pre-ESWL and a non-stented group treated by in situ ESWL. All patients were treated by ESWL using Dornier Doli S lithotripter. Results were compared in terms of clearance rates, number of shock waves and sessions, morbidity, and incidence of complications. Pretreatment KUB (kidneys, ureters, and bladder) and intravenous pyelogram and post-treatment KUB were used to evaluate fragmentation and clearance. RESULTS:Overall stone-free rate was 88.3%. No significant statistical difference was observed in stone-free rate between the stented and non-stented groups being 90% and 86.7%, respectively (P = .346). One session was required in 28.3% of patients, whereas multiple sessions were required in 71.7% of patients. No significant statistical difference was noted in re-treatment rate in the 2 groups. Patients in the stented group significantly complained of side effects attributable to the stent predominantly dysuria, urgency, frequency, and suprapubic pain. CONCLUSIONS:ESWL is an effective and reasonable initial therapy in the management of impacted upper ureteral stones measuring < or = 2 cm. Pre-ESWL ureteral stenting provides no additional benefit over in situ ESWL. Moreover, ureteral stents are associated with significant patient discomfort and morbidity. 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To assess the need for pre-extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (pre-ESWL) stenting in management of impacted upper ureteral stones of size < or = 2 cm and to verify whether stenting would influence the success of therapy. METHODS: Between 2007 and 2008, a total of 60 patients with solitary, radio-opaque impacted upper ureteral stones measuring < or = 2 cm were divided into 2 equal groups: a stented group with a Double-J stent fixed pre-ESWL and a non-stented group treated by in situ ESWL. All patients were treated by ESWL using Dornier Doli S lithotripter. Results were compared in terms of clearance rates, number of shock waves and sessions, morbidity, and incidence of complications. Pretreatment KUB (kidneys, ureters, and bladder) and intravenous pyelogram and post-treatment KUB were used to evaluate fragmentation and clearance. RESULTS: Overall stone-free rate was 88.3%. No significant statistical difference was observed in stone-free rate between the stented and non-stented groups being 90% and 86.7%, respectively (P = .346). One session was required in 28.3% of patients, whereas multiple sessions were required in 71.7% of patients. No significant statistical difference was noted in re-treatment rate in the 2 groups. Patients in the stented group significantly complained of side effects attributable to the stent predominantly dysuria, urgency, frequency, and suprapubic pain. CONCLUSIONS: ESWL is an effective and reasonable initial therapy in the management of impacted upper ureteral stones measuring < or = 2 cm. Pre-ESWL ureteral stenting provides no additional benefit over in situ ESWL. Moreover, ureteral stents are associated with significant patient discomfort and morbidity. 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Xeng Inn Fam; Praveen Singam; Christopher Chee Kong Ho; Radhika Sridharan; Rozita Hod; Badrulhisham Bahadzor; Eng Hong Goh; Guan Hee Tan; Zulkifli Zainuddin Journal: Korean J Urol Date: 2015-01-06
Authors: Caroline Pettenati; Amine Benchikh El Fegoun; Vincent Hupertan; Sébastien Dominique; Vincent Ravery Journal: Cent European J Urol Date: 2013-11-18