Efficacy of the lithotripsy in treating lower pole renal stones

Urological Research

Volumn 41, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 231-234

  Cui, Helen ^a,b   Thomee, Eeke ^a   Noble, Jeremy G ^a   Reynard, John M ^a   Turney, Benjamin W ^a  

^a CHURCHILL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Efficacy; Lithotripsy; Lower pole; Stones

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; CLINICALLY INSIGNIFICANT RESIDUAL FRAGMENT; EXTRACORPOREAL LITHOTRIPSY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GENDER; HUMAN; LITHOTRIPTER; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEPHROLITHIASIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; POLE RENAL STONE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RENAL SYSTEM PARAMETERS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; STONE CLEARANCE; STONE SIZE; URETEROSCOPY; LITHOTRIPSY; METHODOLOGY; PATHOLOGY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; PATIENT DECISION MAKING; SHOCK WAVE LITHOTRIPTER; STONE ANALYSIS; KIDNEY CALCULI; PROCEDURES;

ADULT; AGED; FEMALE; HUMANS; KIDNEY CALCULI; LITHOTRIPSY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84887995224     PISSN: 03005623     EISSN: 14340879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Cortes JA, Motamedinia P, Gupta M (2011) Update on technological and selection factors influencing shockwave lithotripsy of renal stones in adults and children. Curr Opin Urol 21(2): 134-140. doi:10.1097/MOU.0b013e3283435c1f
2. Lin CC, Hsu YS, Chen KK (2008) Predictive factors of lower calyceal stone clearance after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL): the impact of radiological anatomy. J Chin Med Assoc 71(10):496-501. doi:10.1016/S1726- 4901(08)70157-6
3. Talas H, Kilic O, Tangal S, Safak M (2007) Does lower-pole caliceal anatomy predict stone clearance after shock wave lithotripsy for primary lower-pole nephrolithiasis? Urol Int 79(2): 129-132. doi:10.1159/000106325
4. Albala D, Assimos D, Clayman R, Denstedt J, Grasso M, Gutierrez-Aceves J et al (2001) Lower pole I: a prospective randomized trial of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrostolithotomy for lower pole nephrolithiasisinitial results. J Urol 166(6):2072-2080. doi:10.1097/00005392- 200112000-00014
5. Pearle MS, Lingeman JE, Leveillee R, Kuo R, Preminger GM, Nadler RB et al (2005) Prospective randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi 1 cm or less. J Urol 173(6):2005-2009. doi:10.1097/ 01.ju.0000158458.51706.56
6. Sumino Y, Mimata H, Tasaki Y, Ohno H, Hoshino T, Nomura T et al (2002) Predictors of lower pole renal stone clearance after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 168(4):1344-1347. doi:10.1097/00005392-200210010-00009
7. Chiong E, Hwee ST, Kay LM, Liang S, Kamaraj R, Esuvaranathan K (2005) Randomized controlled study of mechanical percussion, diuresis, and inversion therapy to assist passage of lower pole renal calculi after shock wave lithotripsy. Urology 65(6): 1070-1074. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2004.12.045
8. Turk C, Knoll T, Petrik A, Sarica K, Straub M, Seitz C, eds (2012) Guidelines on urolithiasis. 27th Annual EAU Congress, Paris
9. Preminger G (2006) Management of lower pole renal calculi: shock wave lithotripsy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus flexible ureteroscopy. Urol Res 34(2):108-111. doi:10.1007/ s00240-005-0020-6
10. Havel D, Saussine C, Fath C, Lang H, Faure F, Jacqmin D (1998) Single stones of the lower pole of the kidney. Eur Urol 33(4):396-400. doi:10.1159/000019623
11. Dragutescu M, Multescu R, Geavlete B, Mihai B, Ceban E, Geavlete P (2012) Impact of obesity on retrograde ureteroscopic approach. J Med Life 5(2):222-225
12. Handa RK, McAteer JA, Connors BA, Liu Z, Lingeman JE, Evan AP (2012) Optimising an escalating shockwave amplitude treatment strategy to protect the kidney from injury during shockwave lithotripsy. BJU Int 110:E1041-E1047. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X. 2012.11207.x
13. Marsdin E, Noble JG, Reynard JM, Turney BW (2012) Audiovisual distraction reduces pain perception during shockwave lithotripsy. J Endourol 26(5):531-534. doi:10.1089/end.2011. 0430
14. Chaussy C, Schmiedt E, Jocham D, Schüller J, Liedl B (1984) Extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for treatment of urolithiasis. Urology 23(5, Suppl):59-66. doi:10.1016/0090-4295 (84)90243-7
15. Preminger G, Tiselius H, Assimos D, Alken P, Buck C, Gallucci M et al (2007) 2007 Guideline for the management of ureteral calculi. J Urol 178(6):2418-2434. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2007.09.107
16. Turney BW, Reynard JM, Noble JG, Keoghane SR (2011) Trends in urological stone disease. BJU Int 109(7):1082-1087. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10495.x
17. Pearle M, Lingeman J, Leveillee R, Kuo R, Preminger G, Nadler R et al (2005) Prospective, randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi 1 cm or less. J Urol 173(6):2005-2009. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000 158458.51706.56
18. El-Nahas AR, Ibrahim HM, Youssef RF, Sheir KZ (2012) Flexible ureterorenoscopy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of lower pole stones of 10-20 mm. BJU Int 110(6):898-902. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X. 2012.10961.x
19. Matlaga BR, Jansen JP, Meckley LM, Byrne TW, Lingeman JE (2012) Economic outcomes of treatment for ureteral and renal stones: a systematic literature review. J Urol 188(2):449-454. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2012.04.008
20. Koo V, Young M, Thompson T, Duggan B (2011) Cost-effectiveness and efficiency of shockwave lithotripsy vs flexible ureteroscopic holmium:yttrium-Aluminium-garnet laser lithotripsy in the treatment of lower pole renal calculi. BJU Int 108(11):1913-1916. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011. 10172.x
21. Khaitan A, Gupta NP, Hemal AK, Dogra PN, Seth A, Aron M (2002) Post-ESWL, clinically insignificant residual stones: reality or myth? Urology 59(1):20-24. doi:10.1016/S0090-4295(01) 01494-7
22. Delvecchio FC, Preminger GM (2000) Management of residual stones. Urol Clin North Am 27(2):347-354. doi:10.1016/S0094-0143(05)70263-9
23. Alanee S, Ugarte R, Monga M (2010) The effectiveness of shock wave lithotripters: a case matched comparison. J Urol 184(6): 2364-2367. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2010.08.023