Literature DB >> 9467473

Treatment of mid- and lower ureteric calculi: extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy vs laser ureteroscopy. A comparison of costs, morbidity and effectiveness.

A F Bierkens1, A J Hendrikx, J J De La Rosette, G N Stultiens, H P Beerlage, A J Arends, F M Debruyne.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and costs of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) compared with ureteroscopy (URS) in the treatment of mid- and lower ureteric calculi. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The records of patients treated primarily by ESWL and URS were analysed retrospectively. Treatment with ESWL included 63 patients (42 men and 21 women, mean age 52 years, range 23-78, 19 mid- and 44 lower ureteric calculi). All patients received 4000 shock waves at a mean energy setting of 18.1 kV. URS was used in 105 patients, with a 7.2 F miniscope or the 7.1 F flexible scope. Stones were fragmented with a pulsed-dye laser lithotripter at 504 nm and a power of up to 130 mJ (mean 53 mJ) using a 200 or 320 microns fibre. All ureteroscopies were performed with the patient under general (n = 17) or spinal (n = 87) anaesthesia in a mean treatment duration of 34 min. Stones were located in the mid-ureter in 24 patients and in the lower ureter in 80. The outcome was assessed by stone-free rates, re-treatment rates, time to become stone-free, complication and costs.
RESULTS: ESWL for mid- and lower ureteric calculi resulted in a success rate of 90% and 81%, respectively, compared with 96% and 99% for URS. However, patients treated with URS were stone-free within 2 days, whereas patients in the ESWL group required up to 4 months. The best results for ESWL were achieved with stones of < 50 mm2. The costs of URS were higher than those for ESWL.
CONCLUSIONS: ESWL provides a noninvasive, simple and safe option for the management of mid- and lower ureteric calculi, provided that the stones are < 50 mm2; larger stones are best treated by URS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9467473     DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1998.00510.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Urol        ISSN: 0007-1331


  26 in total

1.  Comparision of intracorporeal lithotripsy methods and forceps use for distal ureteral stones: seven years experience.

Authors:  C O Yeniyol; A R Ayder; S Minareci; S Ciçek; T Süelözgen
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 2.  Estimating the effectiveness of various methods of evacuation of kidney stones, on the basis of data obtained on percentage of "stone free" and recurrent stone formation.

Authors:  V M Bilobrov; A Roy; S V Bilobrov
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 2.370

3.  [The frequency-doubled double-pulse Neodym:YAG laser lithotripter (FREDDY) in lithotripsy of urinary stones. First clinical experience].

Authors:  A Ebert; J Stangl; R Kühn; W Schafhauser
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2003-03-05       Impact factor: 0.639

4.  Value of focal applied energy quotient in treatment of ureteral lithiasis with shock waves.

Authors:  Miguel Angel Arrabal-Polo; Miguel Arrabal-Martin; Francisco Palao-Yago; Jose Luis Mijan-Ortiz; Armando Zuluaga-Gomez
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2011-10-15

5.  Fragmentation without extraction in ureteral stones: outcomes of 238 cases.

Authors:  Cemal Göktaş; Rahim Horuz; Oktay Akça; Ali Cihangir Cetinel; Selami Albayrak; Kemal Sarıca
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2011-10-18

Review 6.  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

7.  Does tamsulosin change the management of proximally located ureteral stones?

Authors:  Faruk Yencilek; Sakip Erturhan; Onder Canguven; Hakan Koyuncu; Bulent Erol; Kemal Sarica
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2010-02-25

8.  Ureteroscopic treatment of ureteral lithiasis with pneumatic lithotripsy: analysis of 287 procedures in a public hospital.

Authors:  Kadir Ceylan; Orhan Sünbül; Adem Sahin; Mustafa Güneş
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2005-07-27

9.  Functional and morphological recovery of solitary kidneys after drainage. Double J stent placement vs emergency ureteroscopy: which one is reasonable?

Authors:  Kemal Sarica; Fatih Tarhan; Kutluhan Erdem; Ahmet Halil Sevinc; Rasim Guzel; Bilal Eryildirim
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2017-09-07       Impact factor: 3.436

Review 10.  Pharmacology of stone disease.

Authors:  Khashayar Sakhaee
Journal:  Adv Chronic Kidney Dis       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 3.620

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.