Literature DB >> 8972781

In situ extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for ureteral calculi: investigation of factors influencing stone fragmentation and appropriate number of sessions for changing treatment modality.

H H Kim1, J H Lee, M S Park, S E Lee, S W Kim.   

Abstract

To determine the factors influencing stone fragmentation and to suggest when to change treatment modality for ureteral calculi refractory to repetitive in situ extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), we analyzed 369 patients treated primarily by the second-generation lithotripter, Siemens Lithostar, from March 1989 to December 1993. Three hundred forty-two (92.7%) of the patients were ultimately free of stones after repetitive in situ SWL. The cumulative stone-free rates of the first, second, and third session were 64%, 81%, and 88%, respectively, and the increment in the cumulative stone-free rate thereafter with further repeated in situ SWL was minimal (p < 0.01). The cumulative stone-free rate at the third session was 89%, 87%, and 86% for proximal, middle, and lower ureteral stones, respectively (p > 0.05). The cumulative stone-free rate at the third session was 100%, 90%, 87%, 70%, 67%, and 50% for stones <5 mm, 6 to 10 mm, 11 to 15 mm, 16 to 20 mm, 21 to 25 mm, and >25 mm, respectively (p < 0.001). According to the radiopacity of the stone, the cumulative stone-free rate at the third session was 96% for stones with minimal opacity, 94% for those with moderate opacity, and 70% for highly opaque stones (p < 0.001). The cumulative stone-free rate at the second session was 100% without ureteral obstruction; 80% with mild, 57% with moderate, and 67% with severe obstruction; and 50% in patients with nonappearance of the kidney (p < 0.05). From these observations, it could be concluded that the factors influencing fragmentation were the size and radiopacity of the calculi and the degree of ureteral obstruction, whereas the location of the calculi did not influence the cumulative stone-free rate of repetitive in situ SWL. It is preferable to restrict in situ SWL to three sessions in patients with ureteral calculi refractory to shockwaves. An early change of treatment modality either to ureteroscopic manipulation or to open surgery would be recommended if there were risk factors as listed above.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8972781     DOI: 10.1089/end.1996.10.501

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endourol        ISSN: 0892-7790            Impact factor:   2.942


  6 in total

1.  Prediction of outcome of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the management of ureteric calculi.

Authors:  Mingqing Wang; Qiduo Shi; Xuguang Wang; Kun Yang; Rui Yang
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2010-04-18

2.  Furosemide improves the stone clearance rate of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for kidney stones but not ureteral stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Feng Yao; Ke Li; ShiQuan Huang; XueSong Cheng; XiaoLiang Jiang
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2022-10-15

3.  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

4.  Predictive factors of the outcome of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for ureteral stones.

Authors:  Ji Woong Choi; Phil Hyun Song; Hyun Tae Kim
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2012-06-19

5.  Impact of Pretreatment Hydronephrosis on the Success Rate of Shock Wave Lithotripsy in Patients with Ureteral Stone.

Authors:  Ki Don Chang; Joo Yong Lee; Sung Yoon Park; Dong Hyuk Kang; Hyung Ho Lee; Kang Su Cho
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 2.759

6.  Shock Wave Lithotripsy Outcomes for Upper and Lower Ureteral Stones in Non-obese and Non-Pre-stented Adults: Is One Session Sufficient?

Authors:  Jad K Alsmadi
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-09-26
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.