Matched pair analysis of ureteroscopy vs. shock wave lithotripsy for the treatment of upper ureteric calculi

International Journal of Clinical Practice

Volumn 61, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 784-788

  Stewart, G D ^a   Bariol, S V ^a   Moussa, S A ^a   Smith, G ^a   Tolley, D A ^a  

^a WESTERN GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EXTRACORPOREAL LITHOTRIPSY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HOLMIUM LASER; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NEPHROSTOMY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TUBE REMOVAL; URETER STENT; URETER STONE; URETEROPELVIC JUNCTION; URETEROSCOPY; YAG LASER;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; FEMALE; HUMANS; LITHOTRIPSY, LASER; MALE; MATCHED-PAIR ANALYSIS; MIDDLE AGED; URETERAL CALCULI; URETEROSCOPY;

EID: 34247120094     PISSN: 13685031     EISSN: 17421241     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2007.01296.x     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Segura JW, Preminger GM, Assimos DG, et al. Ureteral Stones Clinical Guidelines Panel summary report on the management of ureteral calculi. The American Urological Association. J Urol 1997; 158: 1915-21.
2. Ehreth JT, Drach GW, Arnett ML, et al. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: multicenter study of kidney and upper ureter versus middle and lower ureter treatments. J Urol 1994; 152: 1379-85.
3. Farsi HM, Mosli HA, Alzimaity M, et al. In situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for primary ureteric calculi. Urology 1994; 43: 776-81.
4. Lam JS, Greene TD, Gupta M. Treatment of proximal ureteral calculi: holmium:YAG laser ureterolithotripsy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 2002; 167: 1972-6.
5. Wu CF, Shee JJ, Lin WY, et al. Comparison between extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and semirigid ureterorenoscope with holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy for treating large proximal ureteral stones. J Urol 2004; 172: 1899-902.
6. Portis AJ, Yan Y, Pattaras JG, et al. Matched pair analysis of shock wave lithotripsy effectiveness for comparison of lithotriptors. J Urol 2003; 169: 58-62.
7. Ng CF, McLornan L, Thompson TJ, et al. Comparison of 2 generations of piezoelectric lithotriptors using matched pair analysis. J Urol 2004; 172: 1887-91.
8. Denstedt JD, Clayman RV, Preminger GM. Efficiency quotient as a means of comparing lithotriptors. J Endourol 1990; 4(Suppl.): 100.
9. Harmon WJ, Sershon PD, Blute ML, et al. Ureteroscopy: current practice and long-term complications. J Urol 1997; 157: 28-32.
10. Pareek G, Hedican SP, Lee FT Jr, et al. Shock wave lithotripsy success determined by skin-to-stone distance on computed tomography. Urology 2005; 66: 941-4.
11. Kohn IJ, Weiss JP. Nephrolithiasis. In: Hanno PM, Malkowicz SB, Wein AJ, eds. Clinical Manual of Urology, 3rd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2001: 231-52.
12. Lee YH, Tsai JY, Jiaan BP, et al. Prospective randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopic lithotripsy for management of large upper third ureteral stones. Urology 2006; 67: 480-4.
13. Gaur DD, Trivedi S, Prabhudesai MR, et al. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: technical considerations and long-term follow-up. BJU Int 2002; 89: 339-43.
14. Tiselius HG, Ackermann D, Alken P et al. Guidelines on Urolithiasis. http://www.uroweb.org/, 2006. European Association of Urology.
15. Graff J, Pastor J, Funke PJ, et al. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral stones: a retrospective analysis of 417 cases. J Urol 1988; 139: 513-6.
16. Coz F, Orvieto M, Bustos M, et al. Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy of 2000 urinary calculi with the modulith SL-20: success and failure according to size and location of stones. J Endourol 2000; 14: 239-46.
17. Liong ML, Clayman RV, Gittes RF, et al. Treatment options for proximal ureteral urolithiasis: review and recommendations. J Urol 1989; 141: 504-9.
18. Singh I, Gupta NP, Hemal AK, et al. Impact of power index, hydroureteronephrosis, stone size, and composition on the efficacy of in situ boosted ESWL for primary proximal ureteral calculi. Urology 2001; 58: 16-22.
19. Pemberton RJ, Tolley DA. Comparison of a new generation electroconductive spark lithotriptor and the Dornier Compact Delta for ureteral calculi in a quarternary referral centre. J Endourol 2006; 20: 732-6.
20. Gettman MT, Segura JW. Management of ureteric stones: issues and controversies. BJU Int 2005; 95(Suppl. 2): 85-93.
21. Razvi HA, Denstedt JD, Chun SS, et al. Intracorporeal lithotripsy with the holmium:YAG laser. J Urol 1996; 156: 912-4.
22. Cheung MC, Lee F, Yip SK, et al. Outpatient holmium laser lithotripsy using semirigid ureteroscope. Is the treatment outcome affected by stone load? Eur Urol 2001; 39: 702-8.
23. Scarpa RM, De LA, Porru D, et al. Holmium:YAG laser uretero-lithotripsy. Eur Urol 1999; 35: 233-8.
24. Devarajan R, Ashraf M, Beck RO, et al. Holmium:YAG lasertripsy for ureteric calculi: an experience of 300 procedures. Br J Urol 1998; 82: 342-7.
25. Teichman JM, Rao RD, Rogenes VJ, et al. Ureteroscopic management of ureteral calculi: electrohydraulic versus holmium:YAG lithotripsy. J Urol 1997; 158: 1357-61.
26. Lotan Y, Gettman MT, Roehrborn CG, et al. Management of ureteral calculi: a cost comparison and decision making analysis. J Urol 2002; 167: 1621-9.