Flexible ureterorenoscopy for lower pole stones: Influence of the collecting system's anatomy

Journal of Endourology

Volumn 28, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 146-151

  Jessen, Jan Peter ^a   Honeck, Patrick ^a   Knoll, Thomas ^a   Wendt Nordahl, Gunnar ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TÜBINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; KIDNEY CALCULI; KIDNEY TUBULES, COLLECTING; LASERS, SOLID-STATE; LENGTH OF STAY; LITHOTRIPSY, LASER; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROGNOSIS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TERTIARY CARE CENTERS; URETEROSCOPY;

EID: 84893476245     PISSN: 08927790     EISSN: 1557900X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/end.2013.0401     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Pearle MS, Lingeman JE, Leveillee R, et al. Prospective, randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi 1 cm or less. J Urol 2005;173:2005-2009.
2. Albala DM, Assimos DG, Clayman RV, et al. Lower pole I: A prospective randomized trial of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrostolithotomy for lower pole nephrolithiasis-initial results. J Urol 2001;166:2072-2080.
3. Sampaio FJ, Aragao AH. Inferior pole collecting system anatomy: Its probable role in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 1992;147:322-324.
4. Danuser H, Muller R, Descoeudres B, Dobry E, Studer UE. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of lower calyx calculi: How much is treatment outcome influenced by the anatomy of the collecting system Eur Urol 2007;52:539-546.
5. Tu rk CKT, Petrik A, Sarica K, Straub M, Seitz C. Guidelines on urolithiasis. Available at: Http://www.uroweb.org/gls/pdf/18-Urolithiasis.pdf. 2012. Accessed: May 23, 2013.
6. Wendt-Nordahl G, Mut T, Krombach P, Michel MS, Knoll T. Do new generation flexible ureterorenoscopes offer a higher treatment success than their predecessors Urol Res 2011;39: 185-188.
7. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: A new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 2004;240:205-213.
8. Elbahnasy AM, Clayman RV, Shalhav AL, et al. Lower-pole caliceal stone clearance after shockwave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and flexible ureteroscopy: Impact of radiographic spatial anatomy. J Endourol 1998;12:113-119.
9. Elbahnasy AM, Shalhav AL, Hoenig DM, et al. Lower caliceal stone clearance after shock wave lithotripsy or ureteroscopy: The impact of lower pole radiographic anatomy. J Urol 1998;159:676-682.
10. Grasso M, Ficazzola M. Retrograde ureteropyeloscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi. J Urol 1999;162:1904-1908.
11. Geavlete P, Multescu R, Geavlete B. Influence of pyelocaliceal anatomy on the success of flexible ureteroscopic approach. J Endourol 2008;22:2235-2239.
12. Resorlu B, Oguz U, Resorlu EB, Oztuna D, Unsal A. The impact of pelvicaliceal anatomy on the success of retrograde intrarenal surgery in patients with lower pole renal stones. Urology 2012;79:61-66.