Literature DB >> 24162954

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

Okan Bas1, Hasan Bakirtas, Nevzat Can Sener, Ufuk Ozturk, Can Tuygun, H N Goksel Goktug, M Abdurrahim Imamoglu.   

Abstract

To compare success and complication rates of shock wave lithotripsy (SWL), flexible ureterorenoscopy (F-URS) and percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PNL) according to modified clavien grading system of renal pelvis stones between 1 and 2 cm. The results of 149 patients were evaluated retrospectively. Patients were divided into three groups as 52 for SWL, 47 for F-URS and 50 for PNL. Complications were evaluated by modified Clavien grading system. In the first group, stone-free rates after a mean of 2, 6 sessions was 86 % (45/52). In Group 2, this ratio was 91.4 % (43/47), and in Group 3, it was 98 % (49/50). The success rate in Group 3 was significantly higher than other groups. Complication rates for Group 1, 2 and 3 were 7.6 % (4/52), 6.3 % (3/47) and 12 % (6/50), respectively. Although PNL was the most successful technique compared with other techniques, complications were also higher in this group. Even though PNL is the most successful, it should be performed for selected patient groups and indications should be carefully evaluated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24162954     DOI: 10.1007/s00240-013-0615-2

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


  31 in total

1.  Use of a working channel catheter during flexible ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy.

Authors:  B K Hollenbeck; S L Spencer; G J Faerber
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Cost analysis of flexible ureterorenoscopy.

Authors:  J W Collins; F X Keeley; A Timoney
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 5.588

3.  Long-term efficacy of combination therapy for struvite staghorn calculi.

Authors:  S B Streem; G Lammert
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Evaluating the importance of mean stone density and skin-to-stone distance in predicting successful shock wave lithotripsy of renal and ureteric calculi.

Authors:  Joshua D Wiesenthal; Daniela Ghiculete; R John D'A Honey; Kenneth T Pace
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2010-07-13

5.  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

6.  Outcomes of shockwave lithotripsy for upper urinary-tract stones: a large-scale study at a single institution.

Authors:  Taku Abe; Koichiro Akakura; Makoto Kawaguchi; Takeshi Ueda; Tomohiko Ichikawa; Haruo Ito; Kuniyoshi Nozumi; Kazuhiro Suzuki
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 2.942

7.  Preoperative nomograms for predicting stone-free rate after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.

Authors:  Kent Kanao; Jun Nakashima; Ken Nakagawa; Hirotaka Asakura; Akira Miyajima; Mototsugu Oya; Takashi Ohigashi; Masaru Murai
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Efficacy and safety of a new-generation shockwave lithotripsy machine in the treatment of single renal or ureteral stones: Experience with 2670 patients.

Authors:  Tulga Egilmez; Mehmet Ilteris Tekin; Murat Gonen; Ferhat Kilinc; Resit Goren; Hakan Ozkardes
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 2.942

9.  Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children with moderate-size kidney stones: results of multi-institutional analysis.

Authors:  Berkan Resorlu; Ali Unsal; Abdulkadir Tepeler; Gokhan Atis; Zafer Tokatli; Derya Oztuna; Abdullah Armagan; Cenk Gurbuz; Turhan Caskurlu; Remzi Saglam
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2012-06-05       Impact factor: 2.649

10.  Renal stone epidemiology: a 25-year study in Rochester, Minnesota.

Authors:  C M Johnson; D M Wilson; W M O'Fallon; R S Malek; L T Kurland
Journal:  Kidney Int       Date:  1979-11       Impact factor: 10.612

View more
  15 in total

1.  A comparison of standard PCNL and staged retrograde FURS in pelvis stones over 2 cm in diameter: a prospective randomized study.

Authors:  Nihat Karakoyunlu; Goksel Goktug; Nevzat Can Şener; Kursad Zengin; Ismail Nalbant; Ufuk Ozturk; Ugur Ozok; Abdurrahim Imamoglu
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2015-04-03       Impact factor: 3.436

2.  Factors affecting complication rates of retrograde flexible ureterorenoscopy: analysis of 1571 procedures-a single-center experience.

Authors:  Okan Baş; Can Tuygun; Onur Dede; Sercan Sarı; Mehmet Çağlar Çakıcı; Ufuk Öztürk; Göksel Göktuğ; Abdurrahim İmamoğlu
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-09-07       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 3.  Retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stones - Part 2.

Authors:  Özcan Kılıç; Murat Akand; Ben Van Cleynenbreugel
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2017-08-01

Review 4.  Clinical application of the therapeutic ultrasound in urologic disease: Part II of therapeutic ultrasound in urology.

Authors:  Minh-Tung Do; Tam Hoai Ly; Min Joo Choi; Sung Yong Cho
Journal:  Investig Clin Urol       Date:  2022-05-16

Review 5.  Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment for renal stones 1-2 cm: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Changjian Zheng; Hongmei Yang; Jun Luo; Bo Xiong; Hongzhi Wang; Qing Jiang
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2015-07-26       Impact factor: 3.436

6.  Flexible Ureterorenoscopy Versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for the Treatment of Renal Pelvis Stones of 10-20 mm in Obese Patients.

Authors:  Babak Javanmard; Mohammad Reza Razaghi; Anahita Ansari Jafari; Mohammad Mohsen Mazloomfard
Journal:  J Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2015-10-27

Review 7.  Flexible ureterorenoscopy (F-URS) with holmium laser versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for treatment of renal stone <2 cm: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yuanyuan Mi; Kewei Ren; Haiyan Pan; Lijie Zhu; Sheng Wu; Xiaoming You; Hongbao Shao; Feng Dai; Tao Peng; Feng Qin; Jian Wang; Yi Huang
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2015-11-04       Impact factor: 3.436

8.  Flexible Ureterorenoscopy versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for the treatment of upper/middle calyx kidney stones of 10-20 mm: a retrospective analysis of 174 patients.

Authors:  Kursat Cecen; Mert Ali Karadag; Aslan Demir; Murat Bagcioglu; Ramazan Kocaaslan; Mustafa Sofikerim
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2014-09-24

9.  Is it necessary to actively remove stone fragments during retrograde intrarenal surgery?

Authors:  You Jin Lee; Dong Jae Bak; Jae-Wook Chung; Jun Nyung Lee; Hyun Tae Kim; Eun Sang Yoo; Bum Soo Kim
Journal:  Investig Clin Urol       Date:  2016-07-12

Review 10.  Flexible ureteroscopy: Technological advancements, current indications and outcomes in the treatment of urolithiasis.

Authors:  Husain Alenezi; John D Denstedt
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2015-06-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.