Literature DB >> 23083650

Residual fragments following ureteroscopic lithotripsy: incidence and predictors on postoperative computerized tomography.

Christopher A Rippel1, Lucas Nikkel, Yu Kuan Lin, Zeeshan Danawala, Vincent Olorunnisomo, Ramy F Youssef, Margaret S Pearle, Yair Lotan, Jay D Raman.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Residual fragments following ureteroscopy for calculi may contribute to stone growth, symptoms or additional interventions. We reviewed our experience with ureteroscopy for calculus disease to define the incidence and establish factors predictive of residual fragments.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Records associated with 667 consecutive ureteroscopic lithotripsy procedures for upper urinary calculi were reviewed. In 265 procedures (40%) computerized tomography was done between 30 and 90 days postoperatively. They comprised the study group. Residual fragments were defined as any residual ipsilateral stone greater than 2 mm.
RESULTS: Included in the study were 121 men and 127 women with a mean age of 47 years. Mean target stone diameter was 7.6 mm. The stone location was the kidney in 30% of cases, ureter in 50%, and kidney and ureter in 20%. Residual fragments were detected on computerized tomography after 101 of 265 procedures (38%). Pretreatment stone size was associated with residual fragments at a rate of 24%, 40% and 58% for stones 5 or less, 6 to 10 and greater than 10 mm, respectively (p <0.001). Additionally, stone location in the kidney (p <0.001) or the kidney and ureter (p = 0.044), multiple calculi (p = 0.003), longer operative time (p = 0.008) and exclusive use of flexible ureteroscopy (p = 0.029) were associated with residual fragments. In a multivariate model only pretreatment stone diameter greater than 5 mm was independently associated with residual fragments after ureteroscopy (diameter 6 to 10 and greater than 10 mm OR 2.03, p = 0.03 and OR 3.74, p = 0.003, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Of patients who underwent ureteroscopic lithotripsy for calculi 38% had residual fragments by computerized tomography criteria, including more than 50% with stones 1 cm or greater. Such data may guide expectations regarding the success of ureteroscopy in attaining stone-free status.
Copyright © 2012 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23083650     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.08.040

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


  16 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  The "old" 15 mm renal stone size limit for RIRS remains a clinically significant threshold size.

Authors:  Hanan Goldberg; Dor Golomb; Yariv Shtabholtz; Shlomi Tapiero; German Creiderman; Avi Shariv; Jack Baniel; David Lifhshitz
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2017-07-29       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  Stone free rates (SFRs) after retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL); are we comparing apples with watermelons?

Authors:  Theodoros Tokas; Udo Nagele
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-03-26       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  Simultaneous vs staged treatment of urolithiasis in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Boyd R Viers; Matthew K Tollefson; David E Patterson; Matthew T Gettman; Amy E Krambeck
Journal:  World J Clin Cases       Date:  2014-11-16       Impact factor: 1.337

5.  Decreased Radiation Exposure and Increased Efficacy in Extracorporeal Lithotripsy Using a New Ultrasound Stone Locking System.

Authors:  Nadia Abid; Emmanuel Ravier; Xavier Promeyrat; Ricardo Codas; Hakim Fassi Fehri; Sebastien Crouzet; Xavier Martin
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2015-08-21       Impact factor: 2.942

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.  Identification of factors associated with postoperative febrile urinary tract infection after ureteroscopy for urinary stones.

Authors:  Koji Mitsuzuka; Osamu Nakano; Norio Takahashi; Makoto Satoh
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2015-09-01       Impact factor: 3.436

8.  The glue-clot technique: a new technique description for small calyceal stone fragments removal.

Authors:  J Cloutier; E R Cordeiro; G M Kamphuis; L Villa; J Letendre; J J de la Rosette; Olivier Traxer
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2014-07-09       Impact factor: 3.436

9.  Comparison of tissue injury from focused ultrasonic propulsion of kidney stones versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.

Authors:  Bret A Connors; Andrew P Evan; Philip M Blomgren; Ryan S Hsi; Jonathan D Harper; Mathew D Sorensen; Yak-Nam Wang; Julianna C Simon; Marla Paun; Frank Starr; Bryan W Cunitz; Michael R Bailey; James E Lingeman
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2013-08-02       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Ureteroscopic lithotripsy in Trendelenburg position for proximal ureteral calculi: a prospective, randomized, comparative study.

Authors:  Jiahua Pan; Wei Xue; Lei Xia; Hai Zhong; Yinchao Zhu; Zhebin Du; Qi Chen; Yiran Huang
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2014-05-14       Impact factor: 2.370

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.