Literature DB >> 20092848

Randomized trial of stone fragment active retrieval versus spontaneous passage during holmium laser lithotripsy for ureteral stones.

Oscar Schatloff1, Uri Lindner, Jacob Ramon, Harry Z Winkler.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We assessed whether allowing spontaneous passage of small fragments is different from complete intraoperative extraction during semirigid ureteroscopy for ureteral stones.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 60 patients undergoing ureteroscopy and holmium laser lithotripsy were randomized to intraoperative fragment retrieval (group 1) or exhaustive lithotripsy and spontaneous fragment expulsion (group 2). The primary outcome was differences in unplanned medical and emergency room visits. Other outcomes were the rehospitalization, pain analgesia, time to complete recovery and 30-day stone-free rates.
RESULTS: Patients in group 1 were younger (47 vs 54 years, p = 0.05). Other characteristics, including stone burden and site, presentation mode, and ureteral dilation and stent placement rates, did not differ between the groups. Group 2 patients had a higher rate of unplanned visits (3% vs 30%, OR 12.4, 95% CI 1.8-80.3, p = 0.01), a trend toward higher rates of rehospitalization (0% vs 10%, p = 0.24) and the need for ancillary treatment (0% vs 7%, p = 0.49), and a lower stone-free rate (100% vs 87%, p = 0.1). Complications developed in 1 group 1 patient and in 2 in group 2, including 2 with postoperative fever and 1 with mucosal undermining of the guidewire.
CONCLUSIONS: Not actively retrieving fragments during semirigid ureteroscopy and holmium laser lithotripsy is associated with a higher risk of unplanned medical visits than complete intraoperative extraction. It also shows a tendency toward higher rates of rehospitalization, residual stones and the need for ancillary procedures. 2010 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20092848     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2009.11.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  17 in total

1.  Active retrieval of stone fragments improves outcomes.

Authors:  Nick Groves-Kirkby
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 14.432

2.  [Calyceal stones].

Authors:  C Netsch; A J Gross
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 3.  To Dust or Not To Dust: a Systematic Review of Ureteroscopic Laser Lithotripsy Techniques.

Authors:  Javier E Santiago; Adam B Hollander; Samit D Soni; Richard E Link; Wesley A Mayer
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 4.  Evaluation of dusting versus basketing - can new technologies improve stone-free rates?

Authors:  Brian Weiss; Ojas Shah
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2016-10-04       Impact factor: 14.432

5.  Use of flexible ureteroscopy in the clinical practice for the treatment of renal stones: results from a large European survey conducted by the EAU Young Academic Urologists-Working Party on Endourology and Urolithiasis.

Authors:  F Sanguedolce; E Liatsikos; P Verze; S Hruby; A Breda; J D Beatty; T Knoll
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2014-03-28       Impact factor: 3.436

Review 6.  What is the stone-free rate following flexible ureteroscopy for kidney stones?

Authors:  Khurshid R Ghani; J Stuart Wolf; J Stuart Wolf
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2015-04-14       Impact factor: 14.432

7.  Basic and advanced technological evolution of laser lithotripsy over the past decade: An educational review by the European Society of Urotechnology Section of the European Association of Urology.

Authors:  Lazaros Tzelves; Bhaskar Somani; Marinos Berdempes; Titos Markopoulos; Andreas Skolarikos
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2021-05

8.  Optimizing Stone-free Rates With Ureteroscopy.

Authors:  Thanmaya G Reddy; Dean G Assimos
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2015

Review 9.  Clinical significance of residual fragments in 2015: impact, detection, and how to avoid them.

Authors:  Simon Hein; Arkadiusz Miernik; Konrad Wilhelm; Fabian Adams; Daniel Schlager; Thomas R W Herrmann; Jens J Rassweiler; Martin Schoenthaler
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-10-23       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 10.  Non-compliance with randomised allocation and missing outcome data in randomised controlled trials evaluating surgical interventions: a systematic review.

Authors:  Temitope E Adewuyi; Graeme MacLennan; Jonathan A Cook
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2015-09-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.