MP54-17 A PROSPECTIVE STUDY ON THE EFFECT OF SHOCKWAVE LITHOTRIPSY ON RENAL FIBROSIS

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyStone Disease: Shock Wave Lithotripsy1 Apr 2016MP54-17 A PROSPECTIVE STUDY ON THE EFFECT OF SHOCKWAVE LITHOTRIPSY ON RENAL FIBROSIS Chi-Fai Ng, Sylvia Luke, Chi-Hang Yee, Kim Lee, John Yuen, and Danny Gohel Chi-Fai NgChi-Fai Ng More articles by this author , Sylvia LukeSylvia Luke More articles by this author , Chi-Hang YeeChi-Hang Yee More articles by this author , Kim LeeKim Lee More articles by this author , John YuenJohn Yuen More articles by this author , and Danny GohelDanny Gohel More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.587AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES There was limited information on the effect of shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) on renal fibrosis. Therefore, we investigate the effect of SWL on renal fibrosis, using urinary procollagen III aminoterminal propeptide (PIIINP) level as a surrogate marker for renal fibrotic process, in human subjects after one section of SWL. Moreover, the role of two renal protective protocols, low-energy shockwave pretreatment protocol and pause-protection protocol, on renal fibrotic process would also be assessed. METHODS 320 patients with a solitary radiopaque renal stone < 15mm, were recruited prospectively for this study. Patients were randomized to receive one of four shockwave (SW) protocols: (1) receiving 80% power (19.2 kV) from beginning until the end of treatment; (2) receiving the first 100 SWs at 40% power (9.6 kV), followed by SWs at 80% power until the end of treatment; (3) receiving 100 shocks at 40% power, followed by a 3-minute pause and then further SWs at 80% power until the end of treatment; and (4) receiving 100 shocks at 80% power, followed by a 3-minute pause and then further SWs at 80% power until the end of treatment. Spot urine samples were collected before and after treatment for two year, for marker measurement. RESULTS Baseline information and treatment parameters of the four groups were comparable. There was no difference between the baseline PIIINP levels among the four treatment groups. There was a significant rise in PIIINP level from 6-weeks until 18 months after SWL for the whole group, as well as individual groups (p<0.05). The level of PIIINP reached a peak at 1-year after SWL and then gradually came back to baseline level at 2-year after SWL. (Figure 1) CONCLUSIONS SWL resulted in a prolonged increase in renal fibrotic process, which was similar in patients treated with different protective treatment protocols. © 2016FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 195Issue 4SApril 2016Page: e733 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2016MetricsAuthor Information Chi-Fai Ng More articles by this author Sylvia Luke More articles by this author Chi-Hang Yee More articles by this author Kim Lee More articles by this author John Yuen More articles by this author Danny Gohel More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...