Literature DB >> 23456210

Efficacy of the lithotripsy in treating lower pole renal stones.

Helen Cui1, Eeke Thomee, Jeremy G Noble, John M Reynard, Benjamin W Turney.   

Abstract

Use of extracorporeal lithotripsy is declining in North America and many European countries despite international guidelines advocating it as a first-line therapy. Traditionally, lithotripsy is thought to have poor efficacy at treating lower pole renal stones. We evaluated the success rates of lithotripsy for lower pole renal stones in our unit. 50 patients with lower pole kidney stones ≤15 mm treated between 3/5/11 and 19/4/12 were included in the study. Patients received lithotripsy on a fixed-site Storz Modulith SLX F2 lithotripter according to a standard protocol. Clinical success was defined as stone-free status or asymptomatic clinically insignificant residual fragments (CIRFs) ≤3 mm at radiological follow-up. The mean stone size was 7.8 mm. The majority of stones (66 %) were between 5 and 10 mm. 28 % of stones were between 10 and 15 mm. For solitary lower pole stones complete stone clearance was achieved in 63 %. Total stone clearance including those with CIRFs was achieved in 81 % of patients. As expected, for those with multiple lower pole stones the success rates were lower: complete clearance was observed in 39 % and combined clearance including those with CIRFs was 56 %. Overall, complete stone clearance was observed in 54 % of patients and clearance with CIRFs was achieved in 72 % of patients. Success rate could not be attributed to age, stone size or gender. Our outcome data for the treatment of lower pole renal stones (≤15 mm) compare favourably with the literature. With this level of stone clearance, a non-invasive, outpatient-based treatment like lithotripsy should remain the first-line treatment option for lower pole stones. Ureteroscopy must prove that it is significantly better either in terms of clinical outcome or patient satisfaction to justify replacing lithotripsy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23456210     DOI: 10.1007/s00240-013-0549-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urolithiasis        ISSN: 2194-7228            Impact factor:   3.436


  21 in total

Review 1.  Management of residual stones.

Authors:  F C Delvecchio; G M Preminger
Journal:  Urol Clin North Am       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 2.241

2.  Single stones of the lower pole of the kidney. Comparative results of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Authors:  D Havel; C Saussine; C Fath; H Lang; F Faure; D Jacqmin
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 20.096

3.  Extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for treatment of urolithiasis.

Authors:  C Chaussy; J Schüller; E Schmiedt; H Brandl; D Jocham; B Liedl
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1984-05       Impact factor: 2.649

4.  Cost-effectiveness and efficiency of shockwave lithotripsy vs flexible ureteroscopic holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser lithotripsy in the treatment of lower pole renal calculi.

Authors:  Vincent Koo; Michael Young; Trevor Thompson; Brian Duggan
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2011-03-31       Impact factor: 5.588

5.  Audiovisual distraction reduces pain perception during shockwave lithotripsy.

Authors:  Emma Marsdin; Jeremy G Noble; John M Reynard; Benjamin W Turney
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2012-02-08       Impact factor: 2.942

Review 6.  Economic outcomes of treatment for ureteral and renal stones: a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Brian R Matlaga; Jeroen P Jansen; Lisa M Meckley; Thomas W Byrne; James E Lingeman
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-06-13       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Predictive factors of lower calyceal stone clearance after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL): the impact of radiological anatomy.

Authors:  Chih-Chieh Lin; Yen-Shen Hsu; Kuang-Kuo Chen
Journal:  J Chin Med Assoc       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 2.743

8.  Does lower-pole caliceal anatomy predict stone clearance after shock wave lithotripsy for primary lower-pole nephrolithiasis?

Authors:  Halit Talas; Ozcan Kilic; Semih Tangal; Mut Safak
Journal:  Urol Int       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.089

9.  Predictors of lower pole renal stone clearance after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.

Authors:  Yasuhiro Sumino; Hiromitsu Mimata; Yoshihisa Tasaki; Hitoshi Ohno; Tetsuji Hoshino; Takeo Nomura; Yoshio Nomura
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Impact of obesity on retrograde ureteroscopic approach.

Authors:  M Drăguţescu; R Mulţescu; B Geavlete; B Mihai; E Ceban; P Geavlete
Journal:  J Med Life       Date:  2012-06-18
View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Applying insights from biofilm biology to drug development - can a new approach be developed?

Authors:  Thomas Bjarnsholt; Oana Ciofu; Søren Molin; Michael Givskov; Niels Høiby
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 84.694

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.