Literature DB >> 3416143

Clinical comparison of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in treating renal calculi.

N Mays1, S Challah, S Patel, E Palfrey, R Creeser, P Vadera, P Burney.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: To compare extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for efficacy in treating renal calculi.
DESIGN: Non-randomised multicentre cohort study with 3 month follow up and 13 month data collection period.
SETTING: Lithotripter centre in London, tertiary referral hospital, and urological clinics in several secondary and tertiary care centres. PATIENTS: 933 of 1001 patients treated by lithotripsy at the lithotripter centre were compared with 195 treated by nephrolithotomy. Missing patients were due to incomplete collection of data. Age and sex distributions and characteristics of the stones were similar in the two treatment groups. Two patients died in the lithotripsy group. Three month follow up was achieved in about 84% of both groups (783/933 for lithotripsy; 163/195 for nephrolithotomy).
INTERVENTIONS: The nephrolithotomy group had surgical nephrolithotomy alone. In the lithotripsy group 83% (774/933) had lithotripsy alone, 11% (103/933) had combined lithotripsy and nephrolithotomy, and 6% (56/933) had lithotripsy plus ureteroscopy. Single and combined lithotripter treatments were analysed as one group and compared with nephrolithotomy. END POINT: Presence of stones three months after treatment.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Presence of residual stones was assessed by plain radiography, ultrasonography, or intravenous urography. After adjustment for age and size and position of stone for patients with single stones the likelihood of being free of stones three months after treatment was significantly greater in the nephrolithotomy group than the lithotripsy group (odds ratio 6.6; 95% confidence interval 3.0 to 14.6) and the response was particularly pronounced with staghorn calculi (62% (8/13) v 15% (141/96) patients free of stones after nephrolithotomy and lithotripsy, respectively). OTHER
FINDINGS: 19%(146/775) of patients who had had lithotripsy had to be readmitted within three months after treatment compared with 14%(23/162) who had nephrolithotomy; and 64%(94/146) of readmissions after lithotripsy were for complications compared with 30%(7/23) of readmissions after nephrolithotomy.
CONCLUSIONS: Nephrolithotomy may be preferable to lithotripsy for treating renal stones and it may not be wise to invest heavily in lithotripsy facilities.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3416143      PMCID: PMC1833939          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.297.6643.253

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  17 in total

1.  Cosmetic reactions to artificial fingernails.

Authors:  O J Stone
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  1987-09

2.  Complications of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: prevention and treatment.

Authors:  R C Newman; L Bezirdjian; G Steinbock; B Finlayson
Journal:  Semin Urol       Date:  1986-08

3.  Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: the Methodist Hospital of Indiana experience.

Authors:  J E Lingeman; D Newman; J H Mertz; P G Mosbaugh; R E Steele; R J Kahnoski; T A Coury; J R Woods
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1986-06       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Kidney changes after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: appearance on MR imaging.

Authors:  B R Baumgartner; K W Dickey; S S Ambrose; K N Walton; R C Nelson; M E Bernardino
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1987-05       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Shock wave treatment for stones in the upper urinary tract.

Authors:  C Chaussy; E Schmiedt
Journal:  Urol Clin North Am       Date:  1983-11       Impact factor: 2.241

6.  Financial analysis, personnel planning and organizational requirements for the installation of a kidney lithotripter in a urologic department.

Authors:  K Miller; G Fuchs; J Rassweiler; F Eisenberger
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  1984       Impact factor: 20.096

7.  Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: first 1000 cases at the London Stone Clinic.

Authors:  G Das; J Dick; M J Bailey; M S Fletcher; D R Webb; M J Kellett; H N Whitfield; J E Wickham
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1987-10-10

8.  Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: analysis of 500 consecutive cases.

Authors:  W J Lee; A D Smith; V Cubelli; F M Vernace
Journal:  Urol Radiol       Date:  1986

9.  Extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy for upper urinary tract calculi. One year's experience at a single center.

Authors:  R A Riehle; W R Fair; E D Vaughan
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1986-04-18       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for kidney stones. An alternative to surgery?

Authors:  C Chaussy; E Schmiedt
Journal:  Urol Radiol       Date:  1984
View more
  4 in total

1.  Treatment of radiolucent renal calculi using ESWL combined with urine alkalinization.

Authors:  M I Ezzat
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 2.370

2.  Gall bladder lithotripsy.

Authors:  G Matthews
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1989-10-28

3.  Treating renal calculi.

Authors: 
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1988 Aug 20-27

Review 4.  Consensus of lithotriptor terminology.

Authors:  D A Tolley
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 4.226

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.