Literature DB >> 21664653

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for moderate sized kidney stones.

Samuel Deem1, Brian Defade, Asmita Modak, Mary Emmett, Fred Martinez, Julio Davalos.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for moderate sized (1-2 cm) upper and middle pole renal calculi in regards to stone clearance rate, morbidity, and quality of life.
METHODS: All patients diagnosed with moderate sized upper and middle pole kidney stones by computed tomography (CT) were offered enrollment. They were randomized to receive either ESWL or PNL. The SF-8 quality of life survey was administered preoperatively and at 1 week and 3 months postoperatively. Abdominal radiograph at 1 week and CT scan at 3 months were used to determine stone-free status. All complications and outcomes were recorded.
RESULTS: PNL established a stone-free status of 95% and 85% at 1 week and 3 months, respectively, whereas ESWL established a stone-free status of 17% and 33% at 1 week and 3 months, respectively. Retreatment in ESWL was required in 67% of cases, with 0% retreatment in PNL. Stone location, stone density, and skin-to-stone distance had no impact on stone-free rates at both visits, irrespective of procedure. Patient-reported outcomes, including overall physical and mental health status, favored a better quality of life for patients who had PNL performed.
CONCLUSION: PNL more often establishes stone-free status, has a more similar complication profile, and has similar reported quality of life at 3 months when compared with ESWL for moderate-sized kidney stones. PNL should be offered as a treatment option to all patients with moderate-sized kidney stones in centers with experienced endourologists.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21664653     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2011.04.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  20 in total

Review 1.  [Modern urinary stone therapy: is the era of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy at an end?].

Authors:  A Miernik; K Wilhelm; P Ardelt; S Bulla; M Schoenthaler
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 2.  Aspects on how extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy should be carried out in order to be maximally effective.

Authors:  Hans-Göran Tiselius; Christian G Chaussy
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2012-06-27

3.  [Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stones].

Authors:  S Schmidt; A Miernik
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 0.639

4.  Ultra-mini PCNL versus flexible ureteroscopy: a matched analysis of treatment costs (endoscopes and disposables) in patients with renal stones 10-20 mm.

Authors:  Martin Schoenthaler; Konrad Wilhelm; Simon Hein; Fabian Adams; Daniel Schlager; Ulrich Wetterauer; Azad Hawizy; Andreas Bourdoumis; Janak Desai; Arkadiusz Miernik
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-01-23       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 5.  Uncovering the real outcomes of active renal stone treatment by utilizing non-contrast computer tomography: a systematic review of the current literature.

Authors:  Theodoros Tokas; Martin Habicher; Daniel Junker; Thomas Herrmann; Jan Peter Jessen; Thomas Knoll; Udo Nagele
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-10-13       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 6.  Effect of urinary stone disease and its treatment on renal function.

Authors:  Ozden Ender; Necmettin Mercimek Mehmet
Journal:  World J Nephrol       Date:  2015-05-06

7.  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

8.  Efficacy of surgical techniques and factors affecting residual stone rate in the treatment of kidney stones.

Authors:  Hüseyin Aydemir; Salih Budak; Şükrü Kumsar; Osman Köse; Hasan Salih Sağlam; Öztuğ Adsan
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2014-09

9.  Does morbid obesity influence the success and complication rates of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for upper ureteral stones?

Authors:  Onur Dede; Nevzat Can Şener; Okan Baş; Gülay Dede; Muhammet Şahin Bağbancı
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2015-03

10.  Comparison of shock wave lithotripsy, flexible ureterorenoscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotripsy on moderate size renal pelvis stones.

Authors:  Okan Bas; Hasan Bakirtas; Nevzat Can Sener; Ufuk Ozturk; Can Tuygun; H N Goksel Goktug; M Abdurrahim Imamoglu
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2013-10-27       Impact factor: 3.436

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.