Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Ureteral Stones: A Retrospective Analysis of 417 Cases

Graff, J.; Pastor, J.; Funke, P.-J.; Mach, P.; Senge, Th.

doi:10.1016/s0022-5347(17)42507-9

Cited by 82 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The rate free of stones (96%) was comparable to the results of other groups, ranging from 88 to 97% (table 4) [Graff et al, 1988;Lingeman et al, 1987;Müller et al, 1986;Meacham and Carlton, 1986]. It is superior to the outcome of ureteroscopy, which achieved successful treatment in 78-80% of the cases [Arnold and Lyon, 1986].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 58%

Management of Ureteral Stones by Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy

Recker

Jaeger²,

Alund³

et al. 1989

Urol Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From April 1985 to March 1987 181 patients with ureteral stones were treated by means of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). Management for proximal calculi changed from in situ ESWL treatment (group n = 27) or placement of a ureteral catheter below calculi (group II, n = 30) to retrograde stone manipulation into renal pelvis (group IV, n = 52) or ESWL treatment under intraoperative irrigation of saline in cases where repositioning failed (group III, n = 50). The best stone-free rate for upper ureteral stones was obtained in group IV with 96% after 6 weeks, presenting also the shortest hospital stay (4.2 days) and lowest quota of postoperative auxiliary procedures (2%). Stones, not being dislodged into renal pelvis (49%), could be treated successfully in 86% by irrigation with saline during ESWL (group III). The stone-free rate decreased in patients with in situ treatment (group I: 67%) or ureteral catheter placement (group II: 83%). Treatment of these stones increased the need of postoperative ancillary procedures to approximately 30%. For distal ureteral stones ESWL and preoperative Zeiss placement achieved a stone-free rate of 95%.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 58%

Management of Ureteral Stones by Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy

Recker

Jaeger²,

Alund³

et al. 1989

Urol Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Stone-free rates of 85 to 95% have been achieved with prior manipulation to push the stone back into the renal pelvis or to bypass the stone with a ureteral stent [4][5][6][7][8][9], On the other hand, success of in situ ESWL without prior manipulation has also been reported with using second generation lithotriptors [10][11][12][13]. In situ ESWL is an attractive proposition, since prior manipulation is more invasive than ESWL itself.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Ureteral Stones Using the Dornier Lithotriptor MFL5000

Fujimoto

Kyo²,

Ichikawa³

et al. 1994

Urol Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A total of 157 ureteral stones in 150 patients were treated by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) using the Dornier lithotriptor MFL5000. Stones were treated in situ in 149 cases and with a double-J ureteral stent bypass in 8 cases due to large stone burden or failure of the preceding in situ ESWL. The average number of ESWL sessions and shock waves were 1.6 and 4,446, respectively. Multiple sessions were required in 58 cases (36.9%) for satisfactory fragmentation. At a 3-month follow-up, 91.7% of the cases treated by in situ ESWL and 50% of those treated with a stent bypass were rendered stone-free, achieving an overall stone-free rate of 89.4%. Ureteroscopic extraction or open ureterolithotomy was performed in 4 cases with an impacted stone for the removal of the residual fragments. No serious complications related to ESWL were observed. In situ ESWL is an effective and noninvasive method of treating ureteral stones. Large and/or impacted stones can also be successfully treated by ESWL with or without a stent bypass, but ureteroscopic or surgical procedures may be necessary to salvage fragments packed in the ureteral edema.

show abstract

“…We do not recommend this as with improved lithotripsy and stone detection technology, this procedure is now considered being out-dated. Some investigators (21) have reported a better outcome of ESWL after stone manipulation, while others (20) have not found a statistical difference. However it can prove difficult to manipulate an impacted stone, and the possibility of post-treatment obstruction by a large fragment in an edematous ureter remains.…”

Section: Co��entsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…A better outcome of ESWL has been reported for kidney stones compared to ureter stones, while others could not demonstrate such differences (20,21). Pace et al investigated a large number of ESWL cases and demonstrated a superior success rate for upper and mid ureter stones compared to distal calculi (22).…”

Section: Co��entsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of emergency extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for obstructing ureteral stones

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

�BSTR�CTPurpose: To assess the efficacy of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) for ureteral calculi during acute renal colic. Materials and Methods: From January 2002 to March 2007, 108 patients were treated by ESWL for obstructing ureteral stones causing acute renal colic. ESWL was performed within 24 hours of the onset of renal colic. Results: The mean age of the patients was 39.5 years (11-72 years). Male/female ratio was 85/23. Mean stone size was 8.45 mm (4-20 mm). They were located in the pelvic (n = 53), iliac (n = 28) or lumbar (n = 27) region. Fragmentation after a single session was complete in 56 patients (52%), incomplete in 28 (26%), and absent in 24 (22%). Patients presenting incomplete fragmentation underwent a second (n = 28) or even a third session (n = 11). Of the 24 patients in whom ESWL had no impact on the stone, 21 underwent ureteroscopy, and in one case open ureterolithotomy for a patient with a hard 17 mm stone, while spontaneous passage occurred in two patients with small stones. Conclusion: Emergency ESWL for obstructing ureteral stones has a satisfactory success rate and very low morbidity. The stone-free rate of retreating ureteral calculi with ESWL decreases significantly after failed initial treatment. Stone size may be the main predictive factor for retreatment. We suggest that no more than 3 treatments should be given for a particular stone due to minimal improvement in the subsequent cumulative treatment success rate.

show abstract

Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Ureteral Stones: A Retrospective Analysis of 417 Cases

Cited by 82 publications

References 9 publications

Management of Ureteral Stones by Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy

Management of Ureteral Stones by Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy

Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Ureteral Stones Using the Dornier Lithotriptor MFL5000

Evaluation of emergency extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for obstructing ureteral stones

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About