Literature DB >> 20092411

What happened to shockwave lithotripsy during the past 22 years? A single-center experience.

Gideon Lorber1, Mordechai Duvdevani, Ofer N Gofrit, Arie Latke, Ran Katz, Ezekiel H Landau, Shimon Meretyk, Dov Pode, Amos Shapiro.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: From 1985 to August 2007 we have performed 15,324 shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) treatments using the Dornier HM3 lithotripter. We studied trends in the characteristics of treatments and patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patient data were recorded in a computerized database. Changes in characteristics of patients and stones treated during this period were reviewed.
RESULTS: A total of 15,324 treatments were performed on 10,734 patients. The following trends were observed: (1) Stone size: A significant increase in the proportion of patients treated for stones up to 10 mm in diameter, no change for stone size of 10 to 20 mm, and a decrease in stones larger than 20 mm in diameter. (2) Stone location: A significant increase in the proportion of patients treated for proximal and distal ureteral calculi, whereas a significant decrease in those with renal pelvic and staghorn stones. (3) Auxiliary procedures: A significant increase in the use of perioperative procedures (stents or ureteral catheters) ranging from 20% during the mid-1980s up to 60% in the year 2007. (4) Presenting symptoms: A significant increase in the percentage of patients referred with pain and a significant decrease in the percentage of patients referred with signs of infection. (5) Repeat SWL: A total of 13% of the patients required a second SWL for the same stone within 90 days of the first procedure. (6) Complication rate: This rate was relatively low, ranging from 1% to 6% per year.
CONCLUSIONS: The evolvement of endourological procedures and techniques resulted in a decreased referral of large kidney stones for SWL. Advanced diagnostic modalities increased the diagnosis of renal colic in patients presenting with pain, and consequently their referral rate and timing for SWL treatment. The use of stents increased because of referral of patients with obstructing stones and infection or for prevention of posttreatment obstruction.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20092411     DOI: 10.1089/end.2009.0152

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


  4 in total

1.  Changes in Urolithiasis Referral Patterns for Shock Wave Lithotripsy over a Decade: Was There Adherence to AUA/EAU Guidelines?

Authors:  Yasser A Noureldin; Mohamed A Elkoushy; Sero Andonian
Journal:  Curr Urol       Date:  2015-09-04

2.  Changing Trends in Surgical Management of Nephrolithiasis among Young Adults: A 15-Year Population-Based Study.

Authors:  Dorit E Zilberman; Tomer Erlich; Nir Kleinmann; Itay M Sabler; Amos Neheman; Guy Verhovsky
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2022-08-21

3.  Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy today.

Authors:  Geert G Tailly
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2013-07

4.  Trends in the treatment of urinary stone disease in Turkey.

Authors:  Kadir Yildirim; Mahmut Taha Olcucu; Muhammed Emre Colak
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2018-07-31       Impact factor: 2.984

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.