Literature DB >> 24973175

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for difficult common bile duct stones: a comparison between 2 different lithotripters in a large cohort of patients.

Paolo Cecinato1, Lorenzo Fuccio1, Francesco Azzaroli1, Andrea Lisotti1, Loredana Correale2, Cesare Hassan3, Federica Buonfiglioli1, Giulio Cariani1, Giuseppe Mazzella1, Franco Bazzoli1, Rosangela Muratori1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for difficult common bile duct (CBD) stones is a safe and effective treatment strategy allowing for bile duct clearance in approximately 90% of patients with a low incidence of mild adverse events.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the CBD clearance rates achieved after ESWL performed with 2 different lithotripters (Siemens Lithostar Plus and Storz Modulith SLX-F2) in a large cohort of patients with difficult CBD stones.
DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database.
SETTING: Tertiary care center. PATIENTS: All of the consecutive patients who underwent ESWL because of difficult CBD stones between 1990 and 2012 were considered suitable for inclusion.
INTERVENTIONS: ESWL with Lithostar Plus or with Modulith SLX-F2. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: CBD clearance.
RESULTS: Three hundred ninety-two patients with difficult CBD stones were treated; 199 patients were treated with the Lithostar Plus and 193 patients with the Modulith SLX-F2. CBD clearance was achieved in 349 patients (89.0%) with no significant difference between the patients treated with Lithostar Plus and those treated with Modulith SLX-F2 (90.5% vs 87.6%; P = .45). Patients treated with Modulith SLX-F2 underwent a significantly lower number of ESWL sessions (3 [range, 2 to 4] vs 3 [range, 2 to 4]; P = .0015), had a lower incidence of ESWL-related adverse events (5.2% vs 13.6%; P = .009), and never required opioid analgesia (P < .001). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective design.
CONCLUSIONS: The Modulith SLX-F2 allows the same clearance rate as the Lithostar Plus but has a significantly lower incidence of adverse events and requires fewer ESWL sessions.
Copyright © 2015 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24973175     DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.04.059

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  4 in total

1.  Outcome of a session of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy before endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for problematic and large common bile duct stones.

Authors:  Tao Tao; Ming Zhang; Qi-Jie Zhang; Liang Li; Tao Li; Xiao Zhu; Ming-Dong Li; Gui-Hua Li; Shu-Xia Sun
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-07-21       Impact factor: 5.742

2.  Biliary and pancreatic lithotripsy devices.

Authors:  Rabindra R Watson; Mansour A Parsi; Harry R Aslanian; Adam J Goodman; David R Lichtenstein; Joshua Melson; Udayakumar Navaneethan; Rahul Pannala; Amrita Sethi; Shelby A Sullivan; Nirav C Thosani; Guru Trikudanathan; Arvind J Trindade; John T Maple
Journal:  VideoGIE       Date:  2018-09-26

3.  Surgical (Open and laparoscopic) management of large difficult CBD stones after different sessions of endoscopic failure: A retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Emad Hamdy Gad; Hazem Zakaria; Yasmin Kamel; Ayman Alsebaey; Talat Zakareya; Mohamed Abbasy; Anwar Mohamed; Ali Nada; Mohammed Alsayed Abdelsamee; Mohamed Housseni
Journal:  Ann Med Surg (Lond)       Date:  2019-05-31

Review 4.  Difficult Biliary Stones: A Comprehensive Review of New and Old Lithotripsy Techniques.

Authors:  Edoardo Troncone; Michelangela Mossa; Pasquale De Vico; Giovanni Monteleone; Giovanna Del Vecchio Blanco
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 2.430

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.