Management of Ureteral Stones with Pneumatic Lithotripsy: Report of 500 Patients

Sözen, Sinan; Küpeli, Bora; Tunç, Lütfi; Şenocak, Çağrı; Alkibay, Turgut; Karaoğlan, Üstünol; Bozkırlı, İbrahim

doi:10.1089/089277903770802236

Cited by 54 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Regarding stone free rate, our study showed 95% stone free rate in group(A) compared with group(B) which showed 65% and the stone migration occurred in 5% in group (A) while it was 30% in group( B) ,this had demonstrated the efficacy of lidocaine jelly in preventing upward stone migration and improving stone free rate, a finding which was comparable to other studies like Ali et al [13] showed 100% stone free rate in 7 patients, Zehri et al [14] study showed 96% stone free rate and 4% stone migration in 24 patients , and Sozen et al [15] studyof 500 patients reported a stone-free and migration rate of 94.6% and 2%, respectively.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

The Efficacy of Using Lidocaine Jelly 2% for Prevention of Inadvertent Retrograde Stone Displacement during Pneumatic Lithotripsy of Upper Ureteral Stone

2016

IJSR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

The Efficacy of Using Lidocaine Jelly 2% for Prevention of Inadvertent Retrograde Stone Displacement during Pneumatic Lithotripsy of Upper Ureteral Stone

2016

IJSR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The stones in different levels of the ureter show various difficulty grades. The effectiveness of ESWL modality applied to proximal, middle and distal ureteral stones was recorded as 77.4% (between 63-100%), 80.3% (between 60-98%) and 77.9% (between 59-100%) respectively (6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In previous studies it has been reported that both of the methods have high effectiveness, close to each other. However many of these studies had reported data belonging to lower ureteral stones (2,3,(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13) and only few of them included upper ureteral stones (5,14,15).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy Versus Ureteroscopic Stone Extraction in the Treatment of Ureteral Stones

Bozkurt¹,

Sancaktutar

Bostanci

et al. 2010

ELECTRON J GEN MED

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These results resemble those from current studies on electively scheduled URS, which range from 86.6% to 94.6% for all ureteral stones, increasing to 95.6% to 100% for distal ones. [13][14][15][16][17][18] Our study has some limitations, namely its retrospective design and that no comparison with a control group was done. Still, to our knowledge, this is the first report focusing on ureteroscopic management of ureteral stones in emergency situations.…”

Section: Commentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emergency Ureteroscopic Management of Ureteral Stones: Why Not?

Osório

Lima

Soares

et al. 2007

Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVESTo describe a single-center experience in the emergency ureteroscopic management of ureteral stones. METHODSWe retrospectively considered the data from 144 patients (mean age 49.6 years, range 23 to 82) who had had obstructive ureteral stones and had undergone emergency ureteroscopy with stone retrieval. Intracorporeal pneumatic lithotripsy was performed when necessary. At the end of the procedure, a ureteral catheter was systematically left in place in 100 patients (69.4%) and removed within 24 hours. In the remaining 44 patients, a double-J stent was preferred and was removed within 30 days, depending on the clinical course. Stone-free status was defined as the complete absence of fragments at 1 month of follow-up. RESULTSThe calculi were more frequently localized in the distal ureter than in the proximal one (90.3% versus 9.7%, respectively). The overall mean stone diameter was 9.1 mm (range 5 to 20). The overall stone-free rate was 92.4%. A greater stone-free rate was obtained in those with stones less than 10 mm (95.8%) than in those with stones larger than 10 mm (89%, P ϭ 0.002). Similarly, a significantly better outcome occurred for those with stones located in the distal ureter (94.6%) than for those with stones in the proximal one (71.4%, P ϭ 0.004). The overall complication rate was 4.2%. The mean hospital stay was 2.5 days (range 1 to 7 R enal colic is often caused by ureteral stones, with most of them located in the distal ureter. 1 When conservative drug therapy does not resolve the symptoms, the placement of a ureteral catheter or nephrostomy tube represents the classic procedure performed for renal colic due to acute ureteral obstruction. These maneuvers can offer a prompt relief from pain for the patient, and they are usually followed by ureteroscopy (URS) or extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL), which currently represents the mainstay of treatment for ureteral stones. 2 Although URS is a more invasive treatment option than ESWL, the success rate of the latter is probably lower, especially for mid and distal ureteral stones. 3,4 To date, ESWL, as a first-line therapeutic option, applied rapidly after the onset of renal colic, has been given very limited attention. Only two randomized trials have been reported, both with encouraging results, even if most cases were of proximal ureteral stones. 5,6 Emergency ESWL is an attractive proposition, because it can result in both stone disintegration and relief from acute obstruction.Recently, the miniaturization of ureteroscopes, together with the introduction of the holmium laser, has improved stone-free rates and decreased the complication rates, widening the indications for URS. 7 Similar to ESWL, emergency URS can result in both stone disintegration and relief from colic pain. However, significant data on the ureteroscopic management of ureteral stones in an emergency setting are completely lacking.We describe our experience in the emergency ureteroscopic management of ureteral stones. The outcome, complications, and supposed advantag...

show abstract

Management of Ureteral Stones with Pneumatic Lithotripsy: Report of 500 Patients

Cited by 54 publications

References 23 publications

The Efficacy of Using Lidocaine Jelly 2% for Prevention of Inadvertent Retrograde Stone Displacement during Pneumatic Lithotripsy of Upper Ureteral Stone

The Efficacy of Using Lidocaine Jelly 2% for Prevention of Inadvertent Retrograde Stone Displacement during Pneumatic Lithotripsy of Upper Ureteral Stone

Comparison of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy Versus Ureteroscopic Stone Extraction in the Treatment of Ureteral Stones

Emergency Ureteroscopic Management of Ureteral Stones: Why Not?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About