Literature DB >> 3168938

Mechanical lithotripsy of bile duct stones in 209 patients--effect of technical advances.

M U Schneider1, W Matek, R Bauer, W Domschke.   

Abstract

Between 1982 and 1987, mechanical lithotripsy of common bile duct (CBD) stones was performed in 209 patients (mean age +/- SD: 72 +/- 10 years), using self-constructed lithotripters and baskets with breaking strengths of approximately 50 and 100 kg between 1982 and 1986, and stronger and bigger baskets with breaking strengths of approximately 125 kg since 1987. Patients with single (49.3%) and multiple stones (50.7%) were distributed about equally. Stone size ranged between 4 and 80 mm (mean longitudinal diameter 18 +/- 9 mm, mean transversal diameter 13 +/- 3 mm), with a majority of the patients (61.2%) having stones of between 10 and 19 mm, and about one-third (32.1%) of the patients with stones greater than or equal to 20 (20-80) mm. The overall success rate of mechanical lithotripsy in all 209 patients treated between 1982 and 1987 was 87.6% including 79.1% for CBD stones greater than or equal to 20 mm and 67.6% for stones greater than or equal to 25 mm. The introduction of baskets with breaking strengths of approximately 125 kg in 1987 considerably increased the success rate of mechanical lithotripsy, especially for "large and giant" CBD stones, to 92.3% (greater than or equal to 20 mm) and 85.7% (greater than or equal to 25 mm), respectively.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3168938     DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-1018186

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Endoscopy        ISSN: 0013-726X            Impact factor:   10.093


  30 in total

1.  Impaction of a lithotripsy basket during endoscopic lithotomy of a common bile duct stone.

Authors:  Nobutada Fukino; Takatsugu Oida; Atsushi Kawasaki; Kenji Mimatsu; Youichi Kuboi; Hisao Kano; Sadao Amano
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-06-14       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 2.  Endoscopic removal of common duct stones: current indications and controversies.

Authors:  R C Horton; A Lauri; J S Dooley
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  1991-02       Impact factor: 2.401

3.  How Should Biliary Stones be Managed?

Authors:  Chan Sup Shim
Journal:  Gut Liver       Date:  2010-06-16       Impact factor: 4.519

Review 4.  Extracorporeal biliary lithotripsy and direct chemolitholysis-an integrated concept.

Authors:  W Domschke
Journal:  Gastroenterol Jpn       Date:  1989-10

5.  Intraductal shock-wave lithotripsy in complicated common bile duct stones.

Authors:  J F Riemann; B Kohler; J Weber; D Schlauch
Journal:  Clin Investig       Date:  1992-02

6.  Fluoroscopically guided laser lithotripsy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for retained bile duct stones: a prospective randomised study.

Authors:  R Jakobs; H E Adamek; M Maier; M Krömer; C Benz; W R Martin; J F Riemann
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 23.059

7.  Nonsurgical management of an impacted mechanical lithotriptor with fractured traction wires: endoscopic intracorporeal electrohydraulic shock wave lithotripsy followed by extra-endoscopic mechanical lithotripsy.

Authors:  Tan Attila; Gary R May; Paul Kortan
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 3.522

8.  Laser lithotripsy of difficult bile duct stones: results in 60 patients using a rhodamine 6G dye laser with optical stone tissue detection system.

Authors:  J Hochberger; J Bayer; A May; S Mühldorfer; J Maiss; E G Hahn; C Ell
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 23.059

9.  Endoscopic balloon dilation lithotripsy for difficult bile duct stones.

Authors:  Jin-Seok Park; Seok Jeong; Jee Young Han; Don Haeng Lee
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-04-23       Impact factor: 3.199

10.  Difficult bile duct stones.

Authors:  Lee McHenry; Glen Lehman
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.