Literature DB >> 26664506

Ureteroscopy in proximal ureteral stones after shock wave lithotripsy failure: Is it safe and efficient or dangerous?

Muhammet Fatih Kilinc1, Omer Gokhan Doluoglu1, Tolga Karakan1, Ayhan Dalkilic2, Nurettin Cem Sonmez2, Yasin Aydogmus3, Berkan Resorlu4.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: We assessed the effectiveness of ureteroscopy (URS) in proximal ureteral stones performed after shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) failure, and determined outcomes in terms of success rate, complications, and operation time.
METHODS: We analyzed data of patients with previous unsuccessful SWL (Group I) and the ones that did not have SWL or URS before (Group II) for proximal ureteral stones between December 2007 and August 2014. Group I included 346 patients who underwent complementary URS and Group II 209 patients who underwent primary URS. Success rates, operation time and complications were compared between groups.
RESULTS: Success rates of complementary and primary URS were 78.9% and 80.9%, respectively. The difference in success rates was not statistically significant between groups (p = 0.57). The complication rates of complementary URS was 12.1%, and 9.5% in primary URS (p = 0.49). No statistically significant differences were noted in terms of gender, age, stone size and side, or lithotripter type between groups. The mean operation time and need for balloon dilatation were higher in complementary URS group compared to the primary URS group, and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Complementary URS may be used safely after SWL failure in proximal ureteral stones. Its success rate and morbidities are similar to primary URS, except for longer operation time and an increased need for balloon dilatation.

Entities:  

Year:  2015        PMID: 26664506      PMCID: PMC4662429          DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.2745

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J        ISSN: 1911-6470            Impact factor:   1.862


  21 in total

Review 1.  Contemporary management of ureteral stones.

Authors:  Markus J Bader; Brian Eisner; Francesco Porpiglia; Glen M Preminger; Hans-Goran Tiselius
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2012-01-14       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 2.  Shock-wave lithotripsy for renal calculi.

Authors:  Margaret S Pearle
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2012-07-05       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Does previous failed ESWL have a negative impact of on the outcome of ureterorenoscopy? A matched pair analysis.

Authors:  Prodromos Philippou; David Payne; Kim Davenport; Anthony G Timoney; Francis X Keeley
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2013-08-28       Impact factor: 3.436

4.  Retrograde intrarenal surgery as second-line therapy yields a lower success rate.

Authors:  R Holland; D Margel; P M Livne; D M Lask; David A Lifshitz
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 2.942

5.  Flexible ureterorenoscopy for the treatment of refractory upper urinary tract stones.

Authors:  P Menezes; A Dickinson; A G Timoney
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 5.588

6.  Transureteral lithotripsy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in management of upper ureteral calculi: a comparative study.

Authors:  Mohammad Reza Nikoobakht; Ala Emamzadeh; Amir Reza Abedi; Kamran Moradi; Abdolrasoul Mehrsai
Journal:  Urol J       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 1.510

7.  Does previous extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy affect the performance and outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy?

Authors:  Emrah Yuruk; Ahmet Tefekli; Erhan Sari; Mert Ali Karadag; Abdulkadir Tepeler; Murat Binbay; Ahmet Yaser Muslumanoglu
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2008-12-16       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Retrograde intrarenal lithotripsy outcome after failure of shock wave lithotripsy.

Authors:  Kobi Stav; Amir Cooper; Amnon Zisman; Dan Leibovici; Arie Lindner; Yoram I Siegel
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Clavien classification of semirigid ureteroscopy complications: a prospective study.

Authors:  Swarnendu Mandal; Apul Goel; Manish Kumar Singh; Rohit Kathpalia; Deepak S Nagathan; Satya N Sankhwar; Vishwajeet Singh; Bhupender P Singh; Rahul J Sinha; Divakar Dalela
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 10.  Current state and future developments of noninvasive treatment of human urinary stones with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.

Authors:  C G Chaussy; G J Fuchs
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 7.450

View more
  5 in total

1.  Impact of previous SWL on ureterorenoscopy outcomes and optimal timing for ureterorenoscopy after SWL failure in proximal ureteral stones.

Authors:  Bora Irer; Mehmet Oguz Sahin; Oguzcan Erbatu; Alperen Yildiz; Sakir Ongun; Onder Cinar; Ahmet Cihan; Mehmet Sahin; Volkan Sen; Oktay Ucer; Fuat Kizilay; Ozan Bozkurt
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2019-05-16       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Complementary Ureterorenoscopy after extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in proximal ureteral stones: success and complications.

Authors:  Erhan Demirelli; Ercan Öğreden; Doğan Sabri Tok; Özay Demiray; Mehmet Karadayi; Ural Oğuz
Journal:  Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992)       Date:  2022-08       Impact factor: 1.712

Review 3.  Does previous unsuccessful shockwave lithotripsy influence the outcomes of ureteroscopy?-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Wei Wang; Liao Peng; Xingpeng Di; Xiaoshuai Gao; Xin Wei
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-05

4.  Can intervals in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy sessions affect success in the treatment of upper ureteral stones?

Authors:  Turgay Turan; Ozgur Efioglu; Yavuz Onur Danacioglu; Furkan Sendogan; Meftun Culpan; Bilal Gunaydin; Ramazan Gokhan Atis; Turhan Caskurlu; Asif Yildirim
Journal:  Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne       Date:  2018-05-21       Impact factor: 1.195

5.  Comparison of ureteroscopy (URS) complementary treatment after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy failure with primary URS lithotripsy with holmium laser treatment for proximal ureteral stones larger than10mm.

Authors:  Feng Yao; XiaoLiang Jiang; Bin Xie; Ning Liu
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2021-09-13       Impact factor: 2.264

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.