OBJECTIVE: Previous studies on the association between extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) and new onset hypertension have only illustrated contradictory results. In order to illustrate the association between SWL and new onset hypertension, a meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies was conducted. METHODS: Relevant literature was searched using PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Search Library. A meta-analysis of the association between SWL and new onset hypertension was performed. Studies were pooled, and summary relative risk was calculated. Subgroup analyses were also conducted. RESULTS: Eleven studies were eligible for our analysis. No statistical significance was detected between SWL and new onset hypertension (RR = 1.06, 95 % CI 0.83-1.35). No association was observed when stratified analyses were performed on age, gender, study design, bilateral SWL, and different machines. CONCLUSION: Our analysis indicated that no association was found between SWL and the development of hypertension.
OBJECTIVE: Previous studies on the association between extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) and new onset hypertension have only illustrated contradictory results. In order to illustrate the association between SWL and new onset hypertension, a meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies was conducted. METHODS: Relevant literature was searched using PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Search Library. A meta-analysis of the association between SWL and new onset hypertension was performed. Studies were pooled, and summary relative risk was calculated. Subgroup analyses were also conducted. RESULTS: Eleven studies were eligible for our analysis. No statistical significance was detected between SWL and new onset hypertension (RR = 1.06, 95 % CI 0.83-1.35). No association was observed when stratified analyses were performed on age, gender, study design, bilateral SWL, and different machines. CONCLUSION: Our analysis indicated that no association was found between SWL and the development of hypertension.
Authors: Amy E Krambeck; Andrew D Rule; Xujian Li; Eric J Bergstralh; Matthew T Gettman; John C Lieske Journal: J Urol Date: 2010-11-13 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Amy E Krambeck; Matthew T Gettman; Audrey L Rohlinger; Christine M Lohse; David E Patterson; Joseph W Segura Journal: J Urol Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Waleed A Eassa; Khaled Z Sheir; Hossam M Gad; Mohamed E Dawaba; Mahmoud R El-Kenawy; Hamdy A Elkappany Journal: J Urol Date: 2008-01-22 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Ahmed el-Assmy; Ahmed R el-Nahas; Ihab A Hekal; Mohamed Badran; Ramy F Youssef; Khaled Z Sheir Journal: J Urol Date: 2008-04-18 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Rajash K Handa; Ziyue Liu; Bret A Connors; Mouhamad Alloosh; David P Basile; Johnathan D Tune; Michael Sturek; Andrew P Evan; James E Lingeman Journal: J Urol Date: 2014-09-22 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Christian Daniel Fankhauser; Nilufar Mohebbi; Josias Grogg; Alexander Holenstein; Qing Zhong; Thomas Hermanns; Tullio Sulser; Johann Steurer; Poyet Cédric Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2018-05-21 Impact factor: 2.370