Flexible Ureterorenoscopy versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for the treatment of upper/middle calyx kidney stones of 10–20 mm: a retrospective analysis of 174 patients
Open Access
- 24 September 2014
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in SpringerPlus
- Vol. 3 (1), 557
- https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-3-557
Abstract
To compare the outcomes of flexible ureterorenoscopy (F-URS) with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for the treatment of upper or mid calyx kidney stones of 10 to 20 mm. A total of 174 patients with radioopaque solitary upper or mid calyx stones who underwent ESWL or F-URS with holmium:YAG laser were enrolled in this study. Each group treated with ESWL and F-URS for upper or mid calyx kidney stones were retrospectively compared in terms of retreatment and stone free rates, and complications. 87% (n = 94) of patients who underwent ESWL therapy was stone free at the end of 3rd month. This rate was 92% (n = 61) for patients of F-URS group (p = 0.270 p > 0.05). Retreatment was required in 12.9% of patients (n = 14) who underwent ESWL and these patients were referred to F-URS procedure after 3rd month radiologic investigations. The retreatment rate of cases who were operated with F-URS was 7.5% (n = 5) (p = 0.270 p > 0.05). Ureteral perforation (Clavien grade 3B) was occured in 3 patients (4.5%) who underwent F-URS. Fever (Clavien grade 1) was noted in 7 and 5 patients from ESWL and F-URS group, respectively (6.4% vs 7.5%) (p = 0.78 p > 0.05). F-URS and ESWL have similar outcomes for the treatment of upper or mid calyx renal stones of 10–20 mm. ESWL has the superiority of minimal invasiveness and avoiding of general anethesia. F-URS should be kept as the second teratment alternative for patients with upper or mid caliceal stones of 10–20 mm and reserved for cases with failure in ESWL.Keywords
This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit:
- Evaluation of outcome following lithotripsyCurrent Opinion in Urology, 2010
- Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stonesPublished by Wiley ,2009
- Evaluation of the Effects of Relationships Between Main Spatial Lower Pole Calyceal Anatomic Factors on the Success of Shock-Wave Lithotripsy in Patients with Lower Pole Kidney StonesUrology, 2008
- Efficacy and Safety of a New-Generation Shockwave Lithotripsy Machine in the Treatment of Single Renal or Ureteral Stones: Experience with 2670 PatientsJournal of Endourology, 2007
- Durability of Flexible Ureteroscopes: A Randomized, Prospective StudyJournal of Urology, 2006
- Complications of 2735 Retrograde Semirigid Ureteroscopy Procedures: A Single-Center ExperienceJournal of Endourology, 2006
- Outcomes of Shockwave Lithotripsy for Upper Urinary-Tract Stones: A Large-Scale Study at a Single InstitutionJournal of Endourology, 2005
- PROSPECTIVE, RANDOMIZED TRIAL COMPARING SHOCK WAVE LITHOTRIPSY AND URETEROSCOPY FOR LOWER POLE CALICEAL CALCULI 1 CM OR LESSJournal of Urology, 2005
- Classification of Surgical ComplicationsAnnals of Surgery, 2004
- USE OF A WORKING CHANNEL CATHETER DURING FLEXIBLE URETEROSCOPIC LASER LITHOTRIPSYJournal of Urology, 2000