| Literature DB >> 24778813 |
P Tomescu1, A Pănuş1, G Mitroi1, O Drăgoescu1, L Stoica1, S Dena1, E Enache1.
Abstract
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) revolutionized the treatment of urolithiasis and gradually became the favorite treatment option so that today it is considered to be the first line of treatment for more than 75% of the patients with urolithiasis. The purpose of this study was the assessment of the therapeutic efficiency, complications and limitations of ESWL in urolithiasis in the initial experience using a third generation electromagnetic lithotripter. Between 2007 and 2008 we performed ESWL for 167 patients with urolithiasis. We recorded 92 patients with single stone (55.1%) and 72 with multiple lithiasis (44.9%). Stone size varied between 7 and 24 mm with an average of 12.3±7.1 mm. Radioopac stones were found in 104 patients (62.3%) while radiolucent stones in 63 only (37.6%). Complete stone disintegration and clearance was achieved in most cases (86.2%). Complications were mostly minor and rare (transitory haematuria, renal colic). Severe complications (renal hematoma, steinstrasse) were diagnosed for a limited number of patients (3.6%) and their management was mostly nonsurgical or minimally invasive (retrograde ureteroscopy). ESWL is therefore the first line of treatment for urolithiasis with stone size smaller than 2.5 cm. It has an efficiency rate above 85%, low procedure time, high safety and good tolerability (new generation lithotripters do not require anesthesia) and minimal complications.Entities:
Keywords: ESWL; Urolithiasis
Year: 2009 PMID: 24778813 PMCID: PMC3945238
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Curr Health Sci J
Indications and contraindications of ESWL
| ESWL Indications | ESWL Contraindications |
| Kidney stones larger than 7 mm in Ø with functional kidney and unobstructed urine passage: | Coagulation disorders |
Fig.1Patient distribution depending on stone location
Case distribution based on stone location
| Location/characteristic | No. of cases | % |
|---|---|---|
| Left kidney | 87 (69 solitary) | 52.1% (41.3%) |
| Right kidney | 73 (55 solitary) | 43.7% (32.9%) |
| Bilateral | 36 | 22.5% |
| Vesicoureteral junction (VUJ) | 7 | 4.2% |
| Solitary stone | 92 | 55.1% |
| Pelvis | 38 | 41.3% |
| Calyx | 21 | 22.8% |
| JPU | 33 | 35.9% |
| Multiple stones | 75 | 44.9% |
| Pelvis + calyx | 41 | 54.6% |
| Multiple calyces | 26 | 34.6% |
| JPU + calyx | 7 | 9.3% |
| JPU + pelvis | 2 | 2.6% |
Fig.2Case distribution by stone composition (COM – calcium oxalate monohydrate, COD – calcium oxalate dihydrate, PAM – struvite)
Fig.3Comparative study of ESWL efficiency based on stone radio-density (Kaplan-Meier analysis of ESWL efficiency; p = 0.0007)