A Prospective Randomized Comparison Between Shock Wave Lithotripsy and Flexible Ureterorenoscopy for Lower Caliceal Stones ≤2 cm: A Single-Center Experience

Abstract

Both SWL and RIRS are safe and efficacious for lower caliceal calculi ≤20 mm. For stones <10 mm, SWL was less invasive and safer than RIRS with efficacy comparable to it. However, for 10-20 mm stones, RIRS was more effective, with lesser retreatment rate.

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment for renal stones 1–2 cm: a meta-analysis

“…The reasons for exclusion: renal stones >2 cm (n = 8), renal stones 1-3 cm (n = 1), and kidney stones 10 mm or less (n = 1). Finally, seven studies [5][6][7][8][9][10][11] were included in the meta-analysis, three RCT [5][6][7] and four CCT [8][9][10][11], published between 2012 and 2014. The literature screening process has been shown in Fig.…”

“…Table 1 shows the quality of the included studies as assessed by the methodological quality. Three studies [5][6][7] described the randomization method. None of the studies used an intent-to-treat design and blinded.…”

“…2. The seven included studies [5][6][7][8][9][10][11] reported postoperative stone-free rate, and the pooled result of meta-analysis indicated that there was statistically significant difference between the ESWL and RIRS group (RR 0.86; 95 % CI 0.77-0.95; P = 0.005) with statistical heterogeneity (I 2 = 54 %). Sensitivity analysis: Excluding the largest analyzed, the results are consistent with excluding pre-agreed (RR 0.88, 95 % CI 0.78-0.99, P = 0.09).…”

“…Four studies [5][6][7]11] with data available for combination had reported retreatment rate. All studies reported to deal with lower calyx stones.…”

“…Seven studies [5][6][7][8][9][10][11] provided available data on the assessment of the complications between the ESWL group and RIRS group. We also used RR for statistical analysis.…”