Literature DB >> 20973739

A prospective randomized comparison between early (<48 hours of onset of colicky pain) versus delayed shockwave lithotripsy for symptomatic upper ureteral calculi: a single center experience.

Anup Kumar1, Nayan K Mohanty, Manoj Jain, Sanjay Prakash, Rajender P Arora.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: The role of early/emergency shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) in symptomatic upper ureteral calculi has still not been established. We have performed a randomized comparison between early (<48 hours) vs delayed (>48 hours) SWL for symptomatic upper ureteral stones less than 1 cm to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of early SWL in these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and sixty consecutive patients with a single radiopaque upper ureteral stone <1 cm, who presented with an episode of colicky pain and who were undergoing treatment between July 2008 and June 2009 in our department were included. The patients were hospitalized and randomized into two groups-group A: SWL was performed within 48 hours of onset of colicky pain (early SWL) using the electromagnetic lithotripter (Dornier Alpha Compact) along with analgesics and hydration therapy; group B: SWL was performed after 48 hours (delayed SWL) along with analgesics and hydration therapy. The statistical analysis was performed in two groups regarding the patient demographic profile, presence of hydronephrosis, time to stone clearance, success rates, number of sessions needed, auxiliary procedures, modified efficiency quotient (EQ), and complications.
RESULTS: Eighty patients were enrolled in each group. The mean stone size was 7.3 mm in group A vs 7.5 mm in group B (P = 0.52). The stone fragmentation rate was 88.75% in group A vs 91.2% in group B (P = 0.35). The overall 3-month stone-free rate was 86.3% (69/80) for group A vs 76.2% (61/80) for group B (P = 0.34). The mean time taken for stone clearance was significantly less in group A than in group B (10.2 days vs 21.1 days; P = 0.01). The number of sessions needed in group A were significantly less than in group B (1.3 vs 2.7; P = 0.01). The auxiliary procedure rate was also significantly lesser in group A than group B (16.3% vs 32.5%; P = 0.001). The modified EQ (in %) was 67.2 in group A vs 59.4 in group B (P = 0.21). The steinstrasse formation and requirement for percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) were significantly less in group A (P:0.02 and P:0.01 respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Early SWL (within 48 hours of onset of colicky pain) is feasible, safe, and highly efficacious in the management of symptomatic proximal ureteral stones <1 cm, resulting in a lesser requirement of number of SWL sessions, time taken for stone clearance, auxiliary procedure rate, and fewer complications in comparison with delayed SWL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20973739     DOI: 10.1089/end.2010.0066

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


  11 in total

1.  Immediate or delayed SWL in ureteric stones: a prospective and randomized study.

Authors:  Sami Uguz; Temucin Senkul; Hasan Soydan; Ferhat Ates; Ilker Akyol; Ercan Malkoc; Kadir Vehbi Baykal
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2012-07-05

2.  Cancer as a risk factor for urinary tract calculi: a retrospective cohort study using 'The Health Improvement Network' : Cancer and urinary tract calculi.

Authors:  Ankush Mittal; Motaz Elmahdy Hassan; Joht Singh Chandan; Brian H Willis; Krishnarajah Nirantharakumar; Kesvapilla Subramonian
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2019-03-16       Impact factor: 3.436

3.  Emergent versus delayed lithotripsy for obstructing ureteral stones: a cumulative analysis of comparative studies.

Authors:  Davide Arcaniolo; Marco De Sio; Jens Rassweiler; Jilian Nicholas; Estevão Lima; Giuseppe Carrieri; Evangelos Liatsikos; Vincenzo Mirone; Manoj Monga; Riccardo Autorino
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2017-02-23       Impact factor: 3.436

4.  Urgent shock wave lithotripsy as first-line treatment for ureteral stones: a meta-analysis of 570 patients.

Authors:  Stefano C M Picozzi; Cristian Ricci; Maddalena Gaeta; Stefano Casellato; Robert Stubinski; Dario Ratti; Giorgio Bozzini; Luca Carmignani
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2012-06-15

5.  Canadian Urological Association guideline: Management of ureteral calculi - Abridged version.

Authors:  Jason Y Lee; Sero Andonian; Naeem Bhojani; Jennifer Bjazevic; Ben H Chew; Shubha De; Hazem Elmansy; Andrea G Lantz-Powers; Kenneth T Pace; Trevor D Schuler; Rajiv K Singal; Peter Wang; Michael Ordon
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 1.862

6.  Canadian Urological Association guideline: Management of ureteral calculi - Full-text.

Authors:  Jason Y Lee; Sero Andonian; Naeem Bhojani; Jennifer Bjazevic; Ben H Chew; Shubha De; Hazem Elmansy; Andrea G Lantz-Powers; Kenneth T Pace; Trevor D Schuler; Rajiv K Singal; Peter Wang; Michael Ordon
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 1.862

7.  Silodosin versus tamsulosin for medical expulsive treatment of ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yuan-Pin Hsu; Chin-Wang Hsu; Chyi-Huey Bai; Sheng-Wei Cheng; Kuan-Chou Chen; Chiehfeng Chen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-08-28       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Factors predicting success of emergency extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (eESWL) in ureteric calculi--a single centre experience from the United Kingdom (UK).

Authors:  A Panah; S Patel; A Bourdoumis; S Kachrilas; N Buchholz; J Masood
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2013-06-09       Impact factor: 3.436

9.  Emergency vs elective ureteroscopy for a single ureteric stone.

Authors:  Abdullatif Al-Terki; Majd Alkabbani; Talal A Alenezi; Tariq F Al-Shaiji; Shabir Al-Mousawi; Ahmed R El-Nahas
Journal:  Arab J Urol       Date:  2020-08-25

10.  Usefulness of early extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in colic patients with ureteral stones.

Authors:  Hyeung Joon Choi; Jin-Hee Jung; Jungbum Bae; Min Chul Cho; Hae Won Lee; Kwang Soo Lee
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2012-12-20
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.