A comparison of holmium:YAG laser with Lithoclast lithotripsy in ureteral calculi fragmentation

Jeon, Seong Soo; Hyun, Jae-Sung; Lee, Kyu‐Sung

doi:10.1111/j.1442-2042.2005.01087.x

Cited by 81 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…When compared with Lithoclast lithotripsy for ureteral calculi fragmentation Ho: YAG lithotripsy was associated with shorter operation time and postoperative hospitalization periods [28].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Holmium : YAG Laser for Intra Corporeal Lithotripsy

Sandhu

Srivastava

Madhusoodanan

et al. 2007

Medical Journal Armed Forces India

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…When compared with Lithoclast lithotripsy for ureteral calculi fragmentation Ho: YAG lithotripsy was associated with shorter operation time and postoperative hospitalization periods [28].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Holmium : YAG Laser for Intra Corporeal Lithotripsy

Sandhu

Srivastava

Madhusoodanan

et al. 2007

Medical Journal Armed Forces India

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Maghsoudi ve ark. yaptığı ileri dönük çalışmada, proksimal üreter taşlarında LL yapılan grupta %2.4, PL (11). Tipu ve ark.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

“…Üreter taşı tedavisinde LL ve PL tedavilerini karşılaştıran yayınlarda, LL gruplarında intra veya post operatif majör bir komplikasyonla karşılaşılmamıştır (1,6,10,11). Bu çalışmalar arasında sadece Jeon ve ark.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Üreter Taşı Tedavisinde Lazer ile Pnömotik Litotripsinin Karşılaştırılması

Kuyucu¹,

Gürlen²,

Gürbüz³

2013

haseki

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ÖzetAmaç: Üreter taşı endoskopik tedavisinde lazer litotripsi ile pnömotik litotripsinin karşılaştırılması.Yöntem: Haziran 2011-Ekim 2012 tarihleri arasında ardışık 150 üreter taşının üreteroskopi ile tedavisi geriye dönük olarak değerlendirildi. Vakalar litotripsi yöntemine göre 2 ana gruba, her ana grup üst, orta ve alt üreter taşı olmak üzere 3 alt gruba ayrıldı. Ana ve alt gruplar taştan temizlenme, minör ve majör komplikasyonlar, JJ stent takımı ve operasyon süreleri bakımından karşılaştırıldı. Bulgular:Pnömotik litotripsi (PL) yapılan 62 hastada taştan temizlenme oranı %83.8 , JJ takılma oranı %61.1, hematüri oranı %69.3 ve mukozal yaralanma veya yalancı pasaj oranları %41.9 idi. Lazer litotripsi (LL) yapılan 88 hastada taştan temizlenme oranı %93.1, JJ stent takılma oranı %31.8 hematüri oranı %43.1 ve mukozal yaralanma veya yalancı pasaj oranı %11.3 idi. Her iki grupta majör komplikasyon gelişmedi. Operasyon süreleri PL grubunda 57.9 dk (15-170) iken LL grubunda 49.3 dk (20-120 dk) idi. Taştan temizlenme oranları arasında her iki ana grup ve alt gruplar arasında istatiksel olarak fark saptanmadı. Hematüri, minör komplikasyon ve JJ stent takılma oranları istatiksel olarak pnömotik litotripsi grubunda daha yüksekti. Methods: A total of 150 consequent patients with ureteral stones, who have been treated by ureteroscopy between June 2011 and October 2012, were retrospectively evaluated. The patients were divided into two main groups according to the treatment method, and each group were divided into three subgroups as upper, middle and lower ureteric stones. The groups and subgroups were compared for use of double-J stent, duration of operation, complications, and stone-free rate.Results:While 62 patients were treated with PL, the remaining 88 patients were treated with LL. For PL group, stone-free rate, double-J stent placement, hematuria and minor complication rates were 83%, 61.1%, 69.3% and 41.9%, respectively; for the LL group, these parameters were 93.1%, 31.8%, 43.1% and 11.3%, respectively. There were no major complications in both groups. The duration of operation in PL and LL groups were 57.9 min and 49.3 min, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the two main groups as well as the subgroups for stone-free rates. Hematuria, minor complications and double-J stent placement rates were statistically higher in PLgroup.Conclusion:There was no difference in treatment success rates beetween LL and PL. LL was superior to PL in terms of minor complications, hematuria, double-J stent placement rates and duration of operation.

show abstract

“…Laser lithotripsy has better stone-free rates and lower complications rates than pneumatic lithotripsy for upper-ureteral stones [4]. Furthermore, laser lithotripsy has advantages over pneumatic lithotripsy with low-retrograde migration of ureteral calculi [5] and flexible ureterorenoscopy (FURS) could reach the migrated stones in the same season. Thus, higher stone-free rates and lower complications can be expected for upper-ureteral stones where laser lithotripsy and flexible ureterorenoscopy are available.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Ureteroscopic Laser Lithotripsy with Laparoscopic Ureterolithotomy for Large Proximal and Mid-Ureter Stones

Kaygısız¹,

Çoşkun²,

Kılıçarslan³

et al. 2015

Urol Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To compare the effectiveness and complications of ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy with laparoscopic ureter laparoscopic ureterolithotomy in mid- or proximal portion of large ureteral stones. Material and Methods: We reviewed patients with large (>15 mm) ureteral stone and those who underwent ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy (URS group) or laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (LU group). The first attempt was considered successful in patients who had residual fragments smaller than 2 mm and no conversion of the primary procedure to another. Results: Sixty patients (URS group 29, LU group 31) met inclusion criteria. FURS was used as an adjunctive procedure in one patient for URS group and in two patients for LU group in the same season. LU had a higher success rate and the first-day stone-free rate when compared with URS. Number of procedures was also significantly higher in URS group. There was no difference in stone-free rates at the first and third months, and length of hospitalization and operation were higher in the LU group. Only two patients in the LU group and one patient in the URS group had major complications. Conclusions: Laparoscopy is an effective option of large proximal and mid-ureter stone treatment; however, URS provides similar stone-free rates at three months as a minimal invasive procedure.

show abstract

A comparison of holmium:YAG laser with Lithoclast lithotripsy in ureteral calculi fragmentation

Cited by 81 publications

References 19 publications

Holmium : YAG Laser for Intra Corporeal Lithotripsy

Holmium : YAG Laser for Intra Corporeal Lithotripsy

Üreter Taşı Tedavisinde Lazer ile Pnömotik Litotripsinin Karşılaştırılması

Comparison of Ureteroscopic Laser Lithotripsy with Laparoscopic Ureterolithotomy for Large Proximal and Mid-Ureter Stones

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About