Literature DB >> 22350018

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

A Miernik1, K Wilhelm, P Ardelt, S Bulla, M Schoenthaler.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Treatment of urolithiasis saw major changes with the introduction of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and percutaneous and ureteroscopic techniques in the 1980s. Since then these minimally invasive treatment modalities have continuously been developed further.
RESULTS: For years ESWL has been the treatment of choice. However, recent years have seen a significant shift towards endoscopic therapies. This can be attributed to the evolving surgical experience in the use of these techniques, but even more to major improvement in the technical equipment. This trend is not backed sufficiently by high-level data (RCTs). Some of the newer data on endoscopic techniques are presented in cohort studies, but most studies are case series. Accordingly, recommendations of the German and international guidelines still focus on ESWL as first-line therapy for most locations and sizes of urinary stones.
CONCLUSION: The analysis of treatment data of our institution confirms these trends and demonstrates high treatment efficiency in modern stone management and a consecutive significant lowering of socio-clinical expenses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22350018     DOI: 10.1007/s00120-012-2828-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urologe A        ISSN: 0340-2592            Impact factor:   0.639


  32 in total

1.  Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy for distal ureteral calculi: a prospective randomized study.

Authors:  R Peschel; G Janetschek; G Bartsch
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Retrograde intrarenal surgery in treatment of nephrolithiasis: is a 100% stone-free rate achievable?

Authors:  Martin Schoenthaler; Konrad Wilhelm; Arndt Katzenwadel; Peter Ardelt; Ulrich Wetterauer; Olivier Traxer; Arkadiusz Miernik
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2012-04-16       Impact factor: 2.942

3.  Percutaneous pyelolithotomy. A new extraction technique.

Authors:  I Fernström; B Johansson
Journal:  Scand J Urol Nephrol       Date:  1976

4.  Comparison of flexible ureteroscopes: deflection, irrigant flow and optical characteristics.

Authors:  Corollos Abdelshehid; Michael T Ahlering; David Chou; Hyung Keun Park; Jay Basillote; David Lee; Isaac Kim; Louis Eichel; Dmitriy Protsenko; Brian Wong; Elspeth McDougall; Ralph V Clayman
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  [Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. Past, present and future].

Authors:  C Chaussy; T Bergsdorf; S Thüroff
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 0.639

6.  [S2 guidelines on diagnostic, therapy and metaphylaxis of urolithiasis : Part 1: Diagnostic and therapy].

Authors:  T Knoll
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 0.639

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

Authors:  Samuel Deem; Brian Defade; Asmita Modak; Mary Emmett; Fred Martinez; Julio Davalos
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2011-06-12       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  Advanced ureteroscopy: wireless and sheathless.

Authors:  G Blake Johnson; Damian Portela; Michael Grasso
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 2.942

9.  Urolithiasis through the ages: data on more than 200,000 urinary stone analyses.

Authors:  Thomas Knoll; Anne B Schubert; Dirk Fahlenkamp; Dietrich B Leusmann; Gunnar Wendt-Nordahl; Gernot Schubert
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-02-22       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Cost effectiveness of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for medium-sized kidney stones. A randomised clinical trial.

Authors:  P Carlsson; A C Kinn; H G Tiselius; H Ohlsén; M Rahmqvist
Journal:  Scand J Urol Nephrol       Date:  1992
View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  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

3.  [Stone treatment tomorrow and the day after].

Authors:  A Miernik; S Hein; F Adams; J Halbritter; M Schoenthaler
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 0.639

4.  [Shock wave lithotripsy in Germany: Results of a nationwide survey].

Authors:  M J Schnabel; W Brummeisl; M Burger; J J Rassweiler; T Knoll; A Neisius; C G Chaussy; H M Fritsche
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 0.639

5.  Radiation exposure during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS): a prospective multicenter evaluation.

Authors:  Simon Hein; Konrad Wilhelm; Arkadiusz Miernik; Martin Schoenthaler; Rodrigo Suarez-Ibarrola; Christian Gratzke; Johannes Salem; Leonidas Karapanos; Christopher Netsch; Benedikt Becker; Armin Secker; Julian Veser; Andreas Neisius; Hans-Martin Fritsche; Marco Julius Schnabel
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2020-03-21       Impact factor: 4.226

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.