Literature DB >> 8501779

Low energy lithotripsy with the Lithostar: treatment results with 19,962 renal and ureteral calculi.

T B Mobley1, D A Myers, W B Grine, J M Jenkins, W R Jordan.   

Abstract

Between November 1988 and January 1992, 19,962 renal and ureteral calculi were treated in the United States using 18 different mobile and 2 fixed base Lithostar lithotriptors. Lithotripsy was performed on 11,516 renal and 8,446 ureteral calculi by 750 urologists using the same technique. The success rate (asymptomatic with stone fragments of 4 mm. or less) for renal stones was 87.9%, the stone-free rate was 68.9% and the retreatment rate was 16.5%. Auxiliary procedures were performed in 32.2% of the renal calculi. The success rate for ureteral calculi was 89.5%, the stone-free rate was 83.5% and the retreatment rate was 10.7%. Auxiliary procedures were performed in 25.5% of the ureteral calculi. The overall success rate was 88.4% stone-free rate 75.5%, retreatment rate 14.0% and auxiliary procedure rate 29.4%. Anesthesia personnel were used in 1.9% of the cases. Low energy extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy was found to be safe and effective.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8501779     DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)36404-2

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


  11 in total

Review 1.  Removal of ureteral stones with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopic procedures. What can we learn from the literature in terms of results and treatment efforts?

Authors:  Hans-Göran Tiselius
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2005-05-29

2.  Shock wave lithotripsy and renal hemorrhage.

Authors:  Jonathan Silberstein; Charles M Lakin; J Kellogg Parsons
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2008

3.  In vitro comminution of model renal calculi using histotripsy.

Authors:  Alexander P Duryea; Adam D Maxwell; William W Roberts; Zhen Xu; Timothy L Hall; Charles A Cain
Journal:  IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 2.725

Review 4.  Histotripsy methods in mechanical disintegration of tissue: towards clinical applications.

Authors:  Vera A Khokhlova; J Brian Fowlkes; William W Roberts; George R Schade; Zhen Xu; Tatiana D Khokhlova; Timothy L Hall; Adam D Maxwell; Yak-Nam Wang; Charles A Cain
Journal:  Int J Hyperthermia       Date:  2015-02-24       Impact factor: 3.914

5.  How painful are shockwave lithotripsy and endoscopic procedures performed at outpatient urology clinics?

Authors:  Byong Chang Jeong; Hyoung Keun Park; Cheol Kwak; Seong-June Oh; Hyeon Hoe Kim
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2005-06-22

6.  Simple and practical nomograms for predicting the stone-free rate after shock wave lithotripsy in patients with a solitary upper ureteral stone.

Authors:  Naoya Niwa; Kazuhiro Matsumoto; Makoto Miyahara; Minami Omura; Hiroaki Kobayashi; Eiji Kikuchi; Akira Miyajima; Kazutoyo Miyata; Mototsugu Oya
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2017-02-20       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 7.  [Ureteroscopy (URS) for ureteric calculi].

Authors:  R Hofmann
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 8.  Shock wave lithotripsy: advances in technology and technique.

Authors:  James E Lingeman; James A McAteer; Ehud Gnessin; Andrew P Evan
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 9.  Treatment protocols to reduce renal injury during shock wave lithotripsy.

Authors:  James A McAteer; Andrew P Evan; James C Williams; James E Lingeman
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 2.309

10.  Shock wave lithotripsy, for the treatment of kidney stones, results in changes to routine blood tests and novel biomarkers: a prospective clinical pilot-study.

Authors:  Stephen F Hughes; Nathan Jones; Samantha J Thomas-Wright; Joseph Banwell; Alyson J Moyes; Iqbal Shergill
Journal:  Eur J Med Res       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 2.175

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.