Abstract
This study aims to make a comparative analysis of the superiority of ESWL and URS in proximal ureteral stones in children. A total of 155 patients under the age of 15 were included in the study. The patients were divided into two groups as Group 1 (n = 80, ESWL) and Group 2 (n = 75, URS) according to the type of procedure performed. The patients in both groups were evaluated in terms of age, gender, lateralization, stone size, stone volüme, stone density, and preoperative hydronephrosis. In addition, both methods used were compared in terms of success rate, time, cost, hospitalization and complications. The mean age were 7.4 ± 2.1 in Group-1 and 8.1 ± 1.8 in Group-2. Demographic, clinical and laboratory data of both groups were similar. The hospitalization time, procedure time, success rate and cost were significantly higher in Group-2. The complication rate was significantly higher in Group-2 (p < 0.001). There was a significant negative correlation between ESWL success and stone volume (ρ -0.375, p = 0.001) and stone density (ρ -0.283, p = 0.011). ESWL can be performed as the first line treatment of proximal ureteral stones in children due to its daily use, low cost, short procedure time and low complication rate. Increasing stone volume and density reduces the success of ESWL.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
