Literature DB >> 9873218

Treatment of renal stones by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.

C Renner1, J Rassweiler.   

Abstract

Based on an extensive review of the literature and our own clinical experience, this article attempts to present clear guidelines for the management of various kidney stones that will be acceptable to clinical urologists and their patients. Regarding our own patients, we compared different studies and discussed the results concerning the anatomical kidney situation, stone size, stone localization and observation time. Stone-free rates of patients with calyceal diverticula calculi range from 4 to 58%, with an increase after longer follow-up periods. According to the importance of residual fragments following extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), we have to distinguish between clinical insignificant residual fragments and clinical significant residual fragments. 24 months following ESWL, stone passage occurs as a continuous process, and if there are no clinical symptoms, any endoscopic procedure should be considered as over-treatment. Newer ESWL technology has increased the percentage of clinically insignificant residual fragments. We consider percutaneous nephrolithotripsy in most of the patients with renal calculi smaller than 30 mm in diameter only as second-line therapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 9873218     DOI: 10.1159/000046302

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nephron        ISSN: 1660-8151            Impact factor:   2.847


  7 in total

1.  CT-calculometry (CT-CM): advanced NCCT post-processing to investigate urinary calculi.

Authors:  Valentin Zumstein; Patrick Betschart; Lukas Hechelhammer; Hans-Peter Schmid; Dominik Abt; Magdalena Müller-Gerbl
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2017-09-25       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Predictions of outcomes of renal stones after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy from stone characteristics determined by unenhanced helical computed tomography: a multivariate analysis.

Authors:  Li-Jen Wang; Yon-Cheong Wong; Cheng-Keng Chuang; Sheng-Hsien Chu; Chih-Shou Chen; Lai-Chu See; Yang-Jen Chiang
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-04-02       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Alternative management of complex renal stones.

Authors:  Millie Pevzner; Brian C Stisser; Jordan Luskin; Jeffrey C Yeamans; Marina Cheng-Lucey; John J Pahira
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2011-01-12       Impact factor: 2.370

4.  Helical CT evaluation of the chemical composition of urinary tract calculi with a discriminant analysis of CT-attenuation values and density.

Authors:  Marie-France Bellin; Raphaëlle Renard-Penna; Pierre Conort; Anne Bissery; Jean-Baptiste Meric; Michel Daudon; Alain Mallet; François Richard; Philippe Grenier
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2004-06-25       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Optimal shock wave rate for shock wave lithotripsy in urolithiasis treatment: a prospective randomized study.

Authors:  Keun Bai Moon; Go San Lim; Jae Seung Hwang; Chae Hong Lim; Jae Won Lee; Jeong Hwan Son; Seok Heun Jang
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2012-11-14

6.  Outcome of shock wave lithotripsy as monotherapy for large solitary renal stones (>2 cm in size) without stenting.

Authors:  Shanmugasundaram Rajaian; Santosh Kumar; Ganesh Gopalakrishnan; Ninan K Chacko; Antony Devasia; Nitin S Kekre
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2010-07

7.  Comparison between two shock wave regimens using frequencies of 60 and 90 impulses per minute for urinary stones.

Authors:  Eduardo Mazzucchi; Artur H Brito; Alexandre Danilovic; Gustavo X Ebaid; Elias Chedid Neto; José Reinaldo Franco de Azevedo; Miguel Srougi
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.365

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.