Perforación del colon ascendente tras litotricia extracorpórea por ondas de choque. Revisión de la literatura médica

Polo, Miguel Ángel Arrabal; Martín, Miguel Arrabal; Ortiz, José Luis Miján; Gómez, Armando Zuluaga

doi:10.1016/j.acuro.2010.02.054

Cited by 2 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When treating stones in the prone position care should be taken to assess for bowel gas that lies within the path of the shock wave. Bowel gas will absorb the energy of the shock and case reports of bowel perforation from prone treatment have been described [79] . A trans-gluteal approach from the supine position can effectively target stones giving rates of success similar to upper ureteric stones [80] .…”

Section: Improving Hit Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

Indications and contraindications for shock wave lithotripsy and how to improve outcomes

Reynolds

Kroczak

Pace

2018

Asian Journal of Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For over 35 years shock wave lithotripsy has proven to be an effective, safe and truly minimally invasive option for the treatment of nephrolithiasis. Various technical factors as well as patient selection can impact the success of the procedure. We used published work focusing on outcomes of shock wave lithotripsy, risk of complications, and strategies for improving stone fragmentation to create this review. Multiple patient and technical factors have been found to impact success of treatment. Skin to stone distance, stone density and composition, size and location of the stone within the urinary system all influence stone free rates. A slower rate with a gradual increasing voltage, precise targeting, proper coupling will improve stone fragmentation and decrease risk of complications. The selection of appropriate patients through a shared decision making process and attention to the technical factors that improve stone free rates is key to providing an effective treatment and patient satisfaction.

show abstract

Section: Improving Hit Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

Indications and contraindications for shock wave lithotripsy and how to improve outcomes

Reynolds

Kroczak

Pace

2018

Asian Journal of Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The location of the perforation varied according to the ESWL treatment area. In six of the sixteen cases [14,15,17,18,20,22], the perforation occurred in the colon, while in the remaining nine cases the small bowel was affected.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…A total of 16 cases have been reported in the literature since 1997 [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27]. Demographics are summarised in Table 1.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The interval from the procedure to the onset of symptoms varied between a few hours and 2 days, with the typical presentation being acute abdominal pain with tenderness at physical examination. Patient's management was surgical from the beginning in 12 cases because of clinical signs of peritonitis [12][13][14]17,18,20,21,24,27]. Only in four cases [19,22,23,25] was conservative management with antibiotic initially preferred.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While gastrointestinal damage has been described as a rare complication of ESWL, the actual incidence is unknown. Bowel perforations are uncommon, having been reported in only 16 cases in the literature to our knowledge [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Bowel Perforation after Extracorporeal Wave Lithotripsy: A Review of the Literature

Fontanet

Farré

Angerri

et al. 2023

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Extracorporeal wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is considered a first-line treatment for renal and ureteral stones up to 10–20 mm in diameter. Complications are uncommon, with a reported rate of 0–6% in the literature. Bowel perforation has only been described in a few case reports but requires rapid diagnosis and treatment. Methods: A review of the literature from PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases was performed including studies reporting bowel perforation secondary to ESWL between January 1990 and June 2022. Results: We found 16 case reports of intestinal perforation in the literature. Although some patients had previously undergone abdominal surgery or had inflammatory intestinal disease, others were without comorbidities that could lead to complications. Abdominal pain was the main symptom and imaging was required to confirm the diagnosis, which usually necessitated a surgical intervention. As regards the ESWL technique, it appears that the combination of a high energy level and the prone position constitutes a risk factor for these rare complications. At the authors’ centre, only one case has been reported among 24,000 ESWL procedures over 20 years: A 59-year-old female who underwent ESWL for a distal right ureteral stone presented acute abdominal pain and free intraperitoneal pelvic fluid on ultrasound. A CT scan revealed a small bowel perforation requiring open laparotomy with primary closure. Conclusions: In conclusion, although bowel perforation after ESWL is rare, progressive abdominal pain with tenderness at physical examination requires proper imaging evaluation to exclude bowel perforation and prompt intervention if required.

show abstract

Perforación del colon ascendente tras litotricia extracorpórea por ondas de choque. Revisión de la literatura médica

Cited by 2 publications

References 8 publications

Indications and contraindications for shock wave lithotripsy and how to improve outcomes

Indications and contraindications for shock wave lithotripsy and how to improve outcomes

Bowel Perforation after Extracorporeal Wave Lithotripsy: A Review of the Literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About