Literature DB >> 8015061

Should upper ureteral calculi be manipulated before extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy? A prospective controlled trial.

A Kumar1, R V Kumar, V K Mishra, R Ahlawat, R Kapoor, M Bhandari.   

Abstract

Whether all upper ureteral stones must be manipulated before extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL*) is an ongoing controversy. In a prospective trial, symptomatic patients with solitary upper ureteral calculi less than 1 year in duration were alternated between ESWL in situ and pre-ESWL stone manipulation. Pretreatment excretory urograms were assessed for stone size and degree of proximal hydroureteronephrosis, which was graded from zero (no dilatation) to 3 (severe dilatation). Stone manipulation was done with the patient under intravenous sedation and local anesthesia. A total of 4,000 shock waves was given in a single session using Siemens Lithostar Plus, and treatment was repeated on days 4, 15 and 30 if required. The patients were evaluated 3 months after onset of therapy with excretory urogram and urine culture. Seventy patients qualified for the study (group 1-35 in situ and group 2-35 stone manipulation) and were comparable in relation to age and sex, stone size and degree of hydronephrosis. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups regarding the number of sessions (group 1-1.86 +/- 1.2 and group 2-2.03 +/- 1.2) or shock wave requirement (group 1-5,705.8 +/- 3,536.9 and group 2-5,549.1 +/- 3,837.2) for stone fragmentation. The degree of proximal dilatation did not contribute significantly towards the outcome (F ratio 0.675, p = 0.57). A total of 30 patients (85.5%) in group 1 had a satisfactory outcome at 3 months, while 3 (8.5%) had significant residual calculi and 2 stones could not be fragmented. Of the manipulated stones 33 (94%) were successfully cleared, while 2 patients required auxiliary procedures. Ureteroscopy was required in 1 patient for upward migration of the stent. Morbidity in both groups was comparable. We conclude that upper ureteral stones should be treated in situ to avoid the morbidity of manipulation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8015061     DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)32729-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  2 in total

1.  Comparison of success rates and financial cost of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy in situ and after manipulation for proximal ureteral stones.

Authors:  J Varkarakis; V Protogerou; S Albanis; F Sofras; C Deliveliotis
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2003-06-24

2.  A stone pushed back to the collecting system - long therapeutic path in centers with limited access to flexible instruments.

Authors:  Ewa Bres-Niewada; Bartosz Dybowski; Piotr Zapała; Sławomir Poletajew; Nina Miązek-Zapała; Irmina Michałek; Piotr Radziszewski
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2018-06-12
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.