The Preferred Treatment for Upper Tract Stones Is Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) or Ureteroscopic: Pro ESWL

Chaussy, C.; Thorsten, Bergsdorf

doi:10.1016/j.urology.2008.08.522

Cited by 14 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…3). The results demonstrated that SFR and EQ at 3 months did not necessarily predict final outcomes of SWL therapy, which is in accordance with previous investigations [17]. Treatment outcomes within 6 months from the last SWL session were generally poor in the 80 to <90 group compared to those in the other groups.…”

Section: Clinical Outcomes Of Swl Therapysupporting

confidence: 88%

“…Patient age was excluded from the nomogram as no significant contribution to SFR prediction was identified by multivariate logistic regression analysis, although the nomogram constituted three factors: stone volume, mean CT attenuation of stones, and SSD [5]. However, SFR at 3 months does not indicate a definite treatment outcome because the continuous passage of stone fragments occurs for up to 24 months after SWL therapy [17]. According to one study, residual stone fragments after SWL cleared spontaneously in 78.6 % of patients with a mean follow-up duration of 4.9 years [18].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Age-related delay in urinary stone clearance in elderly patients with solitary proximal ureteral calculi treated by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated the effects of aging on the stone-free rate (SFR) after shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) for the treatment of proximal ureteral calculi. A total of 247 consecutive patients were retrospectively selected, classified into seven groups set at 10 year increments (from 20 to 90 years), and examined for SFR after SWL. According to our final analysis, 185 male and 62 female patients with an average age of 54.1 years had stones with a diameter of 11.5 mm and a density of 893.1 Hounsfield units. On average, SFR was 74.9 % at 3 months after 1.7 SWL sessions. SFR gradually reached ≥ 90 % for each age-group after 1.5-2 years. Median durations to achieve 50 % SFR were estimated to be 21 and 86 days for those in their 20 and 80 s, respectively. However, the difference between the two estimates was not significant (p = 0.064). The durations to achieve 50 % SFR for the other groups lay between these two estimates. Aging does not affect long-term SFR, but patients aged ≥ 80 years might experience delayed stone clearance within the first 12 months after SWL.

show abstract

Section: Clinical Outcomes Of Swl Therapysupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Age-related delay in urinary stone clearance in elderly patients with solitary proximal ureteral calculi treated by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For ESWL group it took the shockwave lithotripsy time and two hours’ surveillance then patients went back home until follow up a week later as well as for ureteroscopy group it included operation and hospitalization time which is much more (3.0±1.0 vs. 48.0±8.5 hours). Patients underwent ESWL experienced a fast recovery and returned to daily activity within two days while some patients underwent ureteroscopy suffered from voiding symptoms until the ureteral stent was removed postoperative two weeks [25], [26]. The procedural time difference resulted the cost difference (120±25 vs. 1180±258US $).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of ESWL and Ureteroscopic Holmium Laser lithotripsy in Management of Ureteral Stones

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThere are many options for urologists to treat ureteral stones that range from 8 mm to 15 mm, including ESWL and ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy. While both ESWL and ureteroscopy are effective and minimally invasive procedures, there is still controversy over which one is more suitable for ureteral stones.ObjectiveTo perform a retrospective study to compare the efficiency, safety and complications using ESWL vs. ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy in management of ureteral stones.MethodsBetween October 2010 and October 2012, 160 patients who underwent ESWL or ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy at Suzhou municipal hospital for a single radiopaque ureteral stone (the size 8–15 mm) were evaluated. All patients were followed up with ultrasonography for six months. Stone clearance rate, costs and complications were compared.ResultsSimilarity in stone clearance rate and treatment time between the two procedures; overall procedural time, analgesia requirement and total cost were significantly different. Renal colic and gross hematuria were more frequent with ESWL while voiding symptoms were more frequent with ureteroscopy. Both procedures used for ureteral stones ranging from 8 to 15 mm were safe and minimally invasive.ConclusionESWL remains first line therapy for proximal ureteral stones while ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy costs more. To determining which one is preferable depends on not only stone characteristics but also patient acceptance and cost-effectiveness ratio.

show abstract

“…The noninvasive ESWL has become the procedure of choice for treatment of urinary system stones [ 5 ]. This is of special importance for those patients who cannot tolerate anesthesia.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pain control using pethidine in combination with diazepam compared to diclofenac in combination with hyoscine-n-butyl bromide: in patients undergoing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy

Demir¹,

Çeçen²,

Karadağ³

et al. 2015

CEJU

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionExtracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) remains the preferred least invasive treatment for urinary tract stones. The main purpose of this study was to compare two treatment modalities for pain control during the ESWL procedure.Material and methodsFrom 2013 to 2014, 220 patients received ESWL for kidney stones. Before the procedure, the weight and height were measured to determine the body mass index (BMI); in addition, oxygen saturation and the pulse of the patients, as well as pain level were determined. The pain control provided included two different methods: diclofenac sodium plus hyoscine-N-butyl bromide in the first group and pethidine plus diazepam in the second group. The pain level of the patients was determined using two different scales: the Wong-Baker and the Visual Analogue scales (VAS). At the end of three sessions, all patients were evaluated for the stone fragmentation rate by plain abdominal X-ray, and the findings were recorded and analyzed.ResultsA total of 220 patients were enrolled in this study. There were 91 patients in the first group (diclofenac sodium + hyoscine-N-butyl bromide) (male/female: 63/28) and 129 (male/female: 83/46) patients in the second group (pethidine HCL +diazepam). The mean age with SD according to each group was 42.03 (±16.43) and 42.56 (±14.23), respectively (p = 0.8). With regard to pain scores (using the Wong-Baker and VAS scales), the responses were significantly lower in the second group (p <0.001).ConclusionsPethidine in combination with diazepam was superior to diclofenac and Hyoscine-N-butyl bromide for pain in patients undergoing ESWL.

show abstract

The Preferred Treatment for Upper Tract Stones Is Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) or Ureteroscopic: Pro ESWL

Cited by 14 publications

References 39 publications

Age-related delay in urinary stone clearance in elderly patients with solitary proximal ureteral calculi treated by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy

Age-related delay in urinary stone clearance in elderly patients with solitary proximal ureteral calculi treated by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy

Comparison of ESWL and Ureteroscopic Holmium Laser lithotripsy in Management of Ureteral Stones

Pain control using pethidine in combination with diazepam compared to diclofenac in combination with hyoscine-n-butyl bromide: in patients undergoing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About