Literature DB >> 20879860

The effect of fat and nonfat components of the skin-to-stone distance on shockwave lithotripsy outcome.

Fayez T Hammad1, Anita Balakrishnan.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Few studies have addressed the effect of skin-to-stone distance (SSD) on the success of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL). Nevertheless, the effect of the two components of SSD, that is, the fat SSD (FSSD) and nonfat SSD (NFSSD) components, was not previously investigated.
METHODS: In this prospective study, all patients (n = 113) who had single radio-opaque kidney stones and underwent SWL for the first time between January 2006 and June 2007 were recruited. SSD, FSSD, and NFSSD were measured by noncontrast CT scan at 0°, 45°, and 90° and the average was calculated. The outcome was defined as successful (completely stone free or residual fragments ≤ 3 mm) or unsuccessful (residual fragments > 3 mm or complete failure of fragmentation).
RESULTS: Sixty-nine (61%) patients had successful treatment. On univariate analysis, SSD, FSSD, and NFSSD were significantly lower in the successful group compared with those with unsuccessful outcome (71.9 ± 13.3 vs. 86.2 ± 25.1 mm [p = 0.001], 27.2 ± 10.3 vs. 36.1 ± 17.3 mm [p = 0.011], and 44.7 ± 7.2 vs. 50.1 ± 13.9 mm [p = 0.02], respectively). The muscle component of the NFSSD was also lower in the successful group (21.5 ± 4.1 vs. 25.2 ± 10.0 mm [p = 0.01]). On multivariate analysis, factors that independently predicted treatment success were SSD, stone attenuation, and stone size but not the FSSD or NFSSD.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the total SSD appeared to be a significant predictor of SWL success, its fat and nonfat components did not independently predict the final outcome and only appeared to be important through their contribution to the total SSD.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20879860     DOI: 10.1089/end.2009.0685

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


  9 in total

1.  Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy is feasible in morbidly obese patients.

Authors:  Seyed Mohammad Kazem Aghamir; Mohammad Ghasem Mohseni; Seyed Reza Hosseini; Alborz Salavati; Hossein Ganjali; Mohammad Ali Fallah; Hamed Rezaei; Seyed Saeed Modaresi
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2017-06-01

2.  [Effect of the body mass index on outcomes of ureterorenoscopy for renal stones].

Authors:  F Schott; S Knipper; A K Orywal; A J Gross; C Netsch
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 0.639

3.  The feasibility of shockwave lithotripsy for treating solitary, lower calyceal stones over 1 cm in size.

Authors:  Tae Beom Kim; Sang Cheol Lee; Khae Hawn Kim; Han Jung; Sang Jin Yoon; Jin Kyu Oh
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.862

4.  Clinically insignificant residual fragments after flexible ureterorenoscopy: medium-term follow-up results.

Authors:  Faruk Ozgor; Abdulmuttalip Simsek; Murat Binbay; Tolga Akman; Onur Kucuktopcu; Omer Sarilar; Ahmet Yaser Muslumanoglu; Yalcin Berberoglu
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2014-08-01       Impact factor: 3.436

5.  Comparison of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy and flexible ureterorenoscopy for the management of 10-20 mm renal stones in obese patients.

Authors:  Faruk Ozgor; Abdulkadir Tepeler; Fatih Elbir; Omer Sarilar; Zafer Gokhan Gurbuz; Abdullah Armagan; Murat Binbay; Ali Ihsan Tasci
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-12-17       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  Optimizing shock wave lithotripsy: a comprehensive review.

Authors:  Paul D McClain; Jessica N Lange; Dean G Assimos
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2013

7.  The effect of renal cortical thickness on the treatment outcomes of kidney stones treated with shockwave lithotripsy.

Authors:  Chi-Fai Ng; Sylvia Luke; Peter K F Chiu; Jeremy Y C Teoh; Ka-Tak Wong; Simon S M Hou
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2015-04-28

8.  Effectiveness of Flexible Ureterorenoscopy and Laser Lithotripsy for Multiple Unilateral Intrarenal Stones Smaller Than 2 cm.

Authors:  Erdal Alkan; Oguz Ozkanli; Egemen Avci; Mirac Turan; M Murad Başar; Oguz Acar; M Derya Balbay
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2014-06-12

Review 9.  How can and should we optimize extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy?

Authors:  Christian G Chaussy; Hans-Göran Tiselius
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2017-11-25       Impact factor: 3.436

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.