Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy Failure Research Articles

Does Previous Open Nephrolithotomy or Failed Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy Therapy Affect Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Performance and Outcome?

Does Previous Open Nephrolithotomy or Failed Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy Therapy Affect Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Performance and Outcome?

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for lower calyx stones: predicting treatment success

IntroductionThe use of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for lower calyx stones is associated with a high rate of residual fragments. Our aim is to analyse the effectiveness and complications of ESWL for lower calyx stones. MethodsRetrospective review of patients with lower renal calyx stones treated with ESWL between January-2014 and December-2020. Measurement of infundibular length, infundibular width and infundibulopelvic angle in lower renal pole to determine favourable anatomy. ESWL failure: fragments >3 mm detected in plain abdominal film, CT scan and/or renal ultrasound 3 months after treatment.Complications after ESWL, auxiliary procedures along with risk factors associated with perirenal haematoma were analysed. SPSS statistical software was used. Results512 patients with lower calyx stones were treated with ESWL. 80.3% of patients had a favourable anatomy. Overall stone-free rate was 70.5%. Regarding main complications after ESWL, stainstrasse was described in 5 patients and urinary tract infection in 3 patients. 10 perirenal haematomas (2%) were reported. Statistical association was found between antiplatelet treatment and the risk of perirenal haematoma (p = 0.004). Logistic binary regression proved the association between unfavourable anatomy of the lower renal pole (p = 0.000), size of the stone (p = 0.001), number of shock waves (p = 0.003), energy applied (p = 0.038) and the need for additional treatment after ESWL. ConclusionsESWL can still be considered as the initial treatment option for lower renal pole stones. The size of the stone, an unfavourable anatomy of the lower renal calyx, number of shock waves and energy applied can help predict the need for additional treatment.

A randomized comparative study of flexible ureterorenoscopy versus mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treatment of renal stones 2 cm or less

AbstractBackgroundFlexible ureterorenoscopy (fURS) and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) have been increasingly used for the treatment of renal stones. However, current guidelines do not recommend one modality over the other. The aim of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy of treatment with fURS versus mPCNL for renal stones sized 2 cm or less.Materials and methodsA prospective, randomized, comparative study was conducted between January 2019 and July 2021 at 3 tertiary care urology centers. Inclusion criteria were adult patients with renal stone(s) ≤ 2 cm with inappropriateness or failure of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy. Subjects were assigned to 1 of 2 treatment groups, either mPCNL or fURS. Two primary outcomes were assessed: (1) initial success rate, defined as the absence of clinically significant residual fragments (>2 mm) on kidney ureter bladder x-ray and ultrasound on the first postoperative day; and (2) complications, which were reported according to the Modified Clavien-Dindo classification system. Secondary outcomes included final success rate, defined as the absence of clinically significant residual fragments on noncontrast computed tomography on the 90th postoperative day; operative time; auxiliary procedures and blood transfusion rates; hemoglobin drop; and length of hospital stay.ResultsOne hundred eighteen procedures were analyzed (59 in each group). The initial success rate of the mPCNL group (93%) was significantly higher than that of the fURS group (70%). Complications occurred more frequently with mPCNL than fURS (44.1% vs. 18.6%, respectively). Final success rate, operative time, and length of hospital stay were comparable between the 2 groups.ConclusionsMini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy is more effective than fURS as a single-step treatment for renal stones <2 cm because of its higher initial success rate and lower auxiliary procedure rate. However, mPCNL results in significantly higher complication rates than fURS.

Litotricia extracorpórea por ondas de choque (LEOCh) Para litiasis de grupo calicial inferior: ¿cómo predecir el éxito del tratamiento?

IntroductionThe use of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for lower calyx stones is associated with a high rate of residual fragments. Our aim is to analyse the effectiveness and complications of ESWL for lower calyx stones. MethodsRetrospective review of patients with lower renal calyx stones treated with ESWL between January-2014 and December-2020. Measurement of infundibular length, infundibular width and infundibulopelvic angle in lower renal pole to determine favourable anatomy. ESWL failure: fragments >3mm detected in plain abdominal film, CT scan and/or renal ultrasound 3 months after treatment.Complications after ESWL, auxiliary procedures along with risk factors associated with perirenal haematoma were analysed. SPSS statistical software was used. Results512 patients with lower calyx stones were treated with ESWL. 80.3% of patients had a favourable anatomy. Overall stone-free rate was 70.5%. Regarding main complications after ESWL, stainstrasse was described in 5 patients and urinary tract infection in 3 patients. 10 perirenal haematomas (2%) were reported. Statistical association was found between antiplatelet treatment and the risk of perirenal haematoma (p=0.004). Logistic binary regression proved the association between unfavourable anatomy of the lower renal pole (p=0.000), size of the stone (p=0.001), number of shock waves (p=0.003), energy applied (p=0.038) and the need for additional treatment after ESWL. ConclusionsESWL can still be considered as the initial treatment option for lower renal pole stones. The size of the stone, an unfavourable anatomy of the lower renal calyx, number of shock waves and energy applied can help predict the need for additional treatment.

Factors Affecting the Outcome of Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy in Urinary Stone Treatment

Background and aim: The recurrence of urinary stones occurs in two thirds of patients within a 20-year period, making urinary stones a common pathology. Among urology pathologies, kidney stones rank third behind urinary infections and conditions of the prostate. The present study intended to assess various factors affecting the extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) outcome in urinary stone treatment. Methods: This cross-sectional study was carried out on 136 urinary stone patients who underwent extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy in the Department of Urology, Sahiwal Teaching Hospital, Sahiwal for the duration from September 2021 to August 2022. Computed tomography confirmed the presence of stones and measured the size (3-20 mm), distance from skin to stone, location, and density in Hounsfield units. Patient’s characteristics such as estimated rate of glomerular filtration and BMI were measured. A successful ESWL requires at least a 3mm residual renal stone fragment in post-therapy, and at least a complete clearance of ureteric stones at the end of treatment. SPSS version 26 was used for descriptive statistic. Results: Of the total 136 urinary stone patients, there were 108 (79.4%) male and 28 (20.6%) females. The incidence of stones present in proximal ureter, mid, and distal ureter was 72 (52.9%), 7 (5.1%), and 57 (41.9%) respectively. All the patients underwent ESWL 1.5 times (average), and the success rate in first, second, and third session was 67.8% (n=92), 83.8% (n=114), and 91.2% (n=124) respectively. The overall success rate of ESWL was 80.9%. A multivariate analysis revealed that HU [OR=0.89, 95% CI, 0.96-0.98, P=0.001) and stone size [OR=0.79, 95% CI, 0.62-0.98, P=0.051] were significantly affecting the first ESWL session success rate. Third session success rate was significantly affected by stone size [OR=0.76, 95% CI, 0.58-0.95, P=0.015]. Stent associated higher failure rate [OR=6.425, 95% CI, 2.132-18.235, p=0.001] and ESWL failure was three-times higher in females than in male. Conclusion: The present study found that the overall success rate of ESWL in urinary stone treatment was 80.9%. ESWL success rates were affected by stone size and HU. Patients' pain and fragmentation levels should be considered when adjusting the intensity of ESWL. Keywords: Urinary stone treatment, Outcomes, Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy

Comparison of ureteroscopy (URS) complementary treatment after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy failure with primary URS lithotripsy with holmium laser treatment for proximal ureteral stones larger than10mm

BackgroundTo compare ureteroscopy (URS) complementary treatment following extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) failure with primary URS lithotripsy for proximal ureteral stones > 10 mm, and try to find out acceptable number of SWL sessions followed by safe URS.MethodsThis was a retrospective study following approval from Medical Ethics Committee of People's Hospital of Chongqing Banan District. Patients (n = 340) who received URS in our hospital for stones > 10 mm from Jan 2015 to June 2020 were divided into two groups according to their previous SWL history. Group 1 consisted of 160 patients that underwent unsuccessful SWL before URS. Group 2 encompassed 180 patients without SWL before URS. Patient’s operative outcomes were compared. A logistic regression and receiver operator characteristics (ROC) were used to identify the acceptable number of SWL sessions prior to URS, regarding the intra-operative complications of URS.ResultsThe group 1 required more surgery time (41.38 ± 11.39 min vs. 36.43 ± 13.36 min, p = 0.01). At the same time, more intra-operative (68.1% VS 22.8%, p < 0.05) and post-operative (35% VS 18.0%, p = 0.001) complications occurred in group 1. Need more hospital stay in group 1 (2.7 ± 1.2 days vs 1.6 ± 1.1 days, p < 0.05). More patients in group 1 need further URS (16.3% VS 8.9%, p = 0.029). After second URS, the SFR of URS in two groups was insignificant differences (82.5% VS 88.9%, p > 0.05). The median (25–75%) of SWL sessions before URS was 2 (1–3) in group 1. According to the results of logistic regression analysis, patients suffered more SWL failure have an increased risk of complications during URS (OR = 1.995, 95% CI: 1.636–2.434). ROC showed that the optimal number of SWL session followed by URS were 0.5, with a sensitivity of 67.7% and specificity of 71.5%. Intra-operative complication rates of URS treatment were higher in patients who suffered > 1 SWL failure (72.6% vs 57.4%, p = 0.047).ConclusionThere was no acceptable number of SWL sessions that could be followed by URS with fewer intra-operative complications. Patients who underwent previous SWL were likely to suffer more intra-operative complications, the average operating time, hospitalization time, and needing further treatment, during URS treatment for proximal ureteral stones larger than 10 mm.

Predictive factors of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy failure in the treatment of patients with ureterolithiasis

Efficacy of different approaches to the treatment in patients with ureteral calculi and predictive factors for the success are the objects of contemporary studies. However, only few on them studied the duration factor of typical ureterolithiasis symptoms and changes of the ureter wall as predictive factors of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) failure in patients with ureteral stones. The aim of the study was to determine the peculiarities of histological changes in the ureter wall as a result of calculus presence and to evaluate the predictive factors of ESWL failure in patients with ureterolithiasis. Materials and methods. An analysis of the treatment by ESWL in 662 patients with ureterolithiasis was performed. The patients were divided into two groups: Group 1, n = 629 (95.0 %) individuals with effective ESWL and Group 2, n = 33 (5.0 %) patients with ESWL failure when calculi were not eliminated. Stones were found in 378 (57.0 %) patients in the upper third of the ureter, in 50 (7.6 %) – in the middle and in 234 (35.4 %) – in the lower third. For determining the predictors of ESWL failure, the Spearman’s Rank Correlation Coefficient was used. Results. The overall ESWL efficacy in our study was 95.0 %. The strong inverse correlation was found between the ESWL success and duration of symptoms (r = -0.92) and stone size (r = -0.68). Stone localization in the ureter did not influence the ESWL outcomes (r = 0.27). Conclusions. Increasing of the period from the manifestation of primary clinical symptoms to the implementation of ESWL reduces the treatment efficacy. Patients with ureteral stones more than 15 mm have lower stone-free rates after ESWL.

The reasons of unsatisfactory results of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in patients with ureterolithiasis

The article dedicate to the problem of failure of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy in patients with ureterolithiasis and reveal the changes which appear in the ureter in the location of the stone.The aim. Analysis of the results of treatment in patients, suffering ureteric stones, using the ureterolithotripsy procedure after failure extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy.&#x0D; Materials and methods. In 137 patients with ureteric stones, whom ureterolithotripsy procedure after failure extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy was conducted, the symptoms of the disease, the diagnostic methods value, efficacy of surgical treatment and reasons of the failure of previous method of treatment were analyzed.&#x0D; Results. In 135 patients endoscopic removal of stones has been succeeded, in 2 patients because of total obliteration of the ureter, uretero-ureteral anastomosis has been performed. If the symptoms, with are characteristic of ureterolithiasis, persists up to one week stones don’t cause significant macroscopic changes to the ureter wall. If the stone persists in the ureter longer than a week we identified local appearing of oedema. Long–term (more than two months) ureteric stone persistence increase the risk of intramucosal “ingrowth” of the calculi greatly.&#x0D; Conclusion. The URS and ESWL are high effective and minimal invasive methods of surgical intervention for patients with ureterolithiasis, guaranteeing high level of postoperative “stone free rate”. Prolongation of the stone insertion time in the ureter causes the ureteric wall changes, complicating performance of minimal invasive interventions (ureterolithotripsy and extracorporeal shock–wave lithotripsy) and reduce its efficacy.

Outcome of Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Patients Under the Age of 18: An Experience With 112 Cases.

Purpose: Renal calculi are becoming more common among children. Although, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is the first choice in this age group, minimal invasive surgeries, such as percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), are indicated for some patients. Recently, PCNL devices have become smaller in size with acceptable efficacy and lower complications. We evaluated the outcomes and complications of mini-PCNL (MPCNL) surgery in our referral training centers.Materials and Methods: Between September 2012 and January 2020, a total of 112 children under the age of 18, who had shown failure of ESWL, and/or their parents refused to do it, underwent MPCNL (15 Fr). The patients' profiles were reviewed for data collection including preoperative and stone data, operation information, and postoperative complications.Results: Of 112 patients, 69 were boys, and 43 were girls. Their mean age was 8.6 years (14 months to 18 years). Mean stone size was 20 mm (14–34 mm). Seventy-four cases had renal pelvic stone, 22 had pelvis and lower pole, and 16 had staghorn. The mean operation time was 65 min (35–100 min), and mean radiation time was 0.6 min (0.2–1.4 min). Low-grade fever was detected in 14 patients (12.5%). Four patients needed blood transfusion and two had increased creatinine, which improved with conservative management. One patient developed urosepsis that resolved with antibiotic therapy. None of the patients had kidney perforation or other organ injury or death. Early stone-free rate (SFR) after operation was 90.2% (101 patients). Six patients had residual fragment <5 mm, which passed spontaneously in 2 weeks after operation (total SFR 95.3%). Three patients underwent second-look nephroscopy, and ureteroscopy was done for two patients due to migrated stone fragments to the distal ureter.Conclusion: MPCNL is recommended as a safe alternative option for treatment of the nephrolithiasis in children with good outcome and acceptable complications.

Correlative investigation between routine clinical parameters of dual-energy computed tomography and the outcomes of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in children with urolithiasis: a retrospective study.

To evaluate the associations of DECT parameters with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) outcomes in pediatric patients. A retrospective study of consecutive patients with calculi who underwent ESWL and DECT in our hospital was performed in 2011-2019. The primary outcome was DECT imaging's correlation with ESWL outcomes. The secondary outcome was to determine DECT parameters independently predicting ESWL outcomes, including stone-free (SF) and residual stone (RS) statuses. The study included 207 patients. The mean CT attenuations at 140 kVp, 80 kVp, and 120 kVp and effective atomic number (Zeff) were significantly correlated with stone free (SF) and residual stone (RS) (P < 0.05). Areas under the curves (AUCs) of CT attenuations at 120 kVp, 80 kVp, 140 kVp, and dual-energy index (DEI) were 0.784 (95% CI 0.672-0.897), 0.780 (95% CI 0.677-0.884), 0.766 (95% CI 0.658-0.885), and 0.709 (95% CI 0.578-0.840) (all P < 0.05). With cutoffs of 882.5, 1330.5, 1042.5, and 0.103 for CT attenuations at 140 kVp, 80 kVp, 120 kVp, and DEI, respectively, sensitivities and specificities were 75.0% and 31.1%, 83.3% and 31.8%, 80.3% and 31.1%, and 58.3% and 44.7%, respectively. Our results demonstrated that the parameters of DECT could be used to predict ESWL outcomes (especially the SF status) in children with urolithiasis. ESWL success can be accurately predicted by DECT, and it is hard to predict ESWL failure.

Outcomes of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral stones according to ESWL intensity.

BackgroundWe evaluated the treatment outcomes of ureteral stones according to energy intensity generated by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL).MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 150 patients who underwent ESWL for treatment of ureteral stones between September 2018 and February 2020. All stones were confirmed by a computed tomography examination, and the size, location, skin-to-stone distance, and Hounsfield units (HU) of the stones were assessed. In addition, patient characteristics including body mass index and estimated glomerular filtration rate, which can affect treatment outcome, were also evaluated. The success or failure of ESWL was confirmed according to the session, and the factors affecting the treatment outcome were analyzed using a logistic regression model.ResultsOf the 150 patients, 82 (54.7%) had stones in the proximal ureter, 5 (3.3%) in the mid, and 63 (42.0%) in the distal ureter. Patients underwent ESWL an average of 1.5 times, and the success rate according to session was 65.3% for the first, 83.3% for the second, and 90.0% for the third session. A multivariate analysis revealed that stone size [odds ratio (OR) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.66–0.99, P=0.049] and HU (OR 0.99, 95% CI, 0.98–0.99, P=0.001) were significant factors affecting the success rate after the first ESWL session; ESWL intensity was not related to success rate. Stone size (OR 0.78, 95% CI, 0.62–0.96, P=0.022) was the only significant factor affecting the success rate in the third session.ConclusionsStone size and HU affected the ESWL success rate. ESWL intensity was not significantly related to the success rate, so it should be adjusted according to patient pain and the degree of stone fragmentation.

Factors influencing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy efficiency for optimal patient selection.

IntroductionCurrent literature suggests various predictors related to the stone and patient, which could influence stone fragmentation and clearance rates.AimTo establish clinical characteristics of stone disease for patients undergoing extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) which may predict the success of the procedure.Material and methodsOne hundred and nine patients with renal stone disease diagnosed by non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) who underwent ESWL between January 2015 and December 2019 were included in the study. Endpoints: patient being stone free (SF) or when < 4 mm fragments were detected. Age, gender, location, skin-to-stone distance, maximum stone length, stone volume, stone surface area, mean stone Hounsfield units (HU) and highest HU score were explored in uni- and multivariate regression analysis.ResultsStone size revealed the highest prognostic power for ESWL failure, where OR for stone volume and stone surface area were 1.06 (1.03–1.10) and 1.04 (1.02–1.06), respectively (all p < 0.01) while a tendency was observed for skin-to-stone distance 1.02 (1.00–1.03). The amount of energy applied during the procedure to one cubic millimeter of stone volume (SMLI/stone volume) was predictive for treatment success (OR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.41–0.87, p < 0.01). Stone volume (OR = 1.06, 95% CI: 1.00–1.14, p = 0.01) and stone surface area (OR = 1.03, 95% CI: 1.01–1.06, p = 0.02) remained as statistically significant prognostic factors for treatment failure.ConclusionsBoth greater stone volume and stone surface area, as well as lower power delivered per stone volume unit during the ESWL procedure, were found to be significant factors and could be useful to predict treatment failure.

Non-surgical treatment of urinary stone

Some patients with urinary stones can be managed non-surgically through observation, medication, or extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL). Symptomatic urinary stones can initially be treated conservatively using analgesics and hydration. When uncontrolled pain or infection is present, immediate diversion via either percutaneous nephrostomy or ureteral stenting may be necessary. Medical expulsive therapy utilizing alpha-blocker may benefit a selected group of patients with stones larger than 5 mm. Oral or percutaneous chemolysis is a well-established non-invasive option with a reasonable success rate for patients with a certain component such as uric acid. When medical treatment is applied, its unintended side effects should be considered and routinely monitored. Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy is a highly effective and safe modality in treating urinary stones when adequately indicated. In addition to the size and location of the stone, information obtained from non-enhanced computed tomography such as stone density, stone heterogenicity index, and stone-to-skin distance can be applied to predict the possibility of ESWL failure. Modifications in shock wave delivery by altering shock rate and voltage can improve shock wave efficacy. Urinary stones can be managed effectively and safely using non-surgical approaches.

Impact of body mass index on success, complications and failure of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy

Introduction: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is known as the most common method in treating urinary stones (70%) and is a selective method to treat small urinary stones (&lt;2-2.5 cm). General opinion is that the success rate of ESWL in obese patients is low and risk of complications is high. Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of body mass index (BMI) and the stone-to-skin distance on success, complications and failure of ESWL. Patients and Methods: In this study, 222 patients who referred to lithotripsy clinic of Kashani hospital of Shahrekord to break stones with diameters of 5 to 20 mm participated in the study. Their urinary stones were in kidneys, lower calyces, upper calyces, pelvis or proximal ureter and were divided into two equal groups of BMI &gt;25 kg/m2 and BMI &lt;25 kg/m2 . Assessing the position and diameter of the stones was based on radiographic findings such as sonography and CT scan. Regarding success, failure and complications of lithotripsy, two groups were compared. Results: Around 105 and 117 patients out of 222 subjects, were respectively assigned in BMI&gt;25 kg/ m2 and BMI &lt;25 kg/m2 groups. The failure and success of both groups were statistically significant (P=0.023). In terms of treatment outcomes, difference between two groups was high in low skinto-stone distance (SSD). Logistic regression showed that both BMI and SSD are effective factors in treating the stone while SSD was more effective (P=0.004) than BMI (P=0.023) since SSD&gt;7.5 cm predicts treatment failure. Conclusion: BMI and SSD are effective factors on the outcome of ESWL. Higher BMI and SSD&gt; 7.5 cm are effective factors on treatment failure.

Flexible Ureteroscopy with Laser Lithotripsy versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in Management of Ureteric Stones in Pediatric Age Group

Background: pediatric stone disease is one of the most common urological issues in pediatric urology practice. The incidence of urinary stone disease is increasing in children in last decades. Aim of the Work: determination of the efficacy and outcome of flexible ureteroscopy using holmium Yttrium aluminium garne laser lithotripsy and compare its results with that of Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy EWSL in management of ureteric stones in pediatric age group. Patients and Methods: this study included 40 patients in pediatric age group. Complaining of upper ureteric stones less than (1cm). Patients underwent either ESWL or Flexible Ureteroscopy randomly according to 1: 1 ratio. The procedures were done at Eldemerdash hospital and National Institute of Urology and Nephrology. The patients were divided into two groups. Group A: Patients undergone extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). Group B: Patients received flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy. Results: there was no statistically significant difference found between the two studied groups regarding age, sex, size and BMI, and stone free rate. Also there was highly statistically significant difference as regard hospital stay. The SWL group required a shorter period of hospitalization and there was highly statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding duration of the procedure which is more prolonged in flexible group. Conclusion: flexible URS lithotripsy and laser are considered a safe, highly efficient, minimally invasive, and reproducible surgery technique -with a higher stone free rates and less postoperative complications, after a single procedure, when compared to ESWL- for management of upper ureteric calculi in children after failure of ESWL.

Flexible Ureteroscopy with Laser Lithotripsy versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in Management of Ureteric Stones in Pediatric Age Group

Background: pediatric stone disease is one of the most common urological issues in pediatric urology practice. The incidence of urinary stone disease is increasing in children in last decades. Aim of the Work: determination of the efficacy and outcome of flexible ureteroscopy using holmium Yttrium aluminium garne laser lithotripsy and compare its results with that of Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy EWSL in management of ureteric stones in pediatric age group. Patients and Methods: this study included 40 patients in pediatric age group. Complaining of upper ureteric stones less than (1cm). Patients underwent either ESWL or Flexible Ureteroscopy randomly according to 1: 1 ratio. The procedures were done at Eldemerdash hospital and National Institute of Urology and Nephrology. The patients were divided into two groups. Group A: Patients undergone extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). Group B: Patients received flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy. Results: there was no statistically significant difference found between the two studied groups regarding age, sex, size and BMI, and stone free rate. Also there was highly statistically significant difference as regard hospital stay. The SWL group required a shorter period of hospitalization and there was highly statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding duration of the procedure which is more prolonged in flexible group. Conclusion: flexible URS lithotripsy and laser are considered a safe, highly efficient, minimally invasive, and reproducible surgery technique -with a higher stone free rates and less postoperative complications, after a single procedure, when compared to ESWL- for management of upper ureteric calculi in children after failure of ESWL.

Factors Affecting the Outcome of Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy in Urinary Stone Treatment

We sought to evaluate the factors affecting the outcome of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) in urinary stone treatment. We conducted a retrospective review of 235 adult patients treated with ESWL, for radiopaque renal or ureteric stones between January 2015 and December 2016. Patient's age, sex, stone size, laterality, location, density, skin-to-stone distance (SSD), and presence of double J stent were studied as potential predictors. At the end of three months, the patients were divided into success and failure groups and the significance was determined. Of the 235 patients (188 males and 47 females) analyzed, ESWL was successful in 79.1%. Univariate analysis of both groups revealed no significant difference in patient's age and stone laterality. Statistically significant differences in gender, stone size, stone site, stone density, SSD, and patients with stents were observed. Statistically significant factors in multivariate logistic regression analysis were sex and stent. Females had three-times higher risk for ESWL failure than males (odds ratio (OR) = 3.213; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.194-8.645; p = 0.021) and a higher failure rate when a stent was used (OR = 6.358; 95% CI: 2.228-18.143; p = 0.001). This study revealed that ESWL can treat renal and ureteric stones successfully with an inverse association between outcome and predictors such as stone size and density, SSD, and stent presence. These factors can help us in improving patient selection and ensure better results at lower cost.

Management of upper urinary tract calculi in crossed fused renal ectopic anomaly.

The aim of the present study was to summarize the management of upper urinary tract calculi in crossed fused renal ectopia (CFRE). Two patients were retrospectively studied in Xiangya Hospital (Changsha, China) and all relevant literature published in English between 1996 and 2016 was reviewed. All patients, including those reported in the literature, were characterized by age, sex, manifestation, therapy history, ectopic side, stone location, surgery and outcome. The patients had a mean age of 42.3±18.5 years, a male: Female ratio of 5:4 and the ratio of renal ectopic side was 9:8 (left:right). All patients suffered from different degrees of pain on the affected side, with or without hematuria. Up to 89% of patients presented with renal stones. These patients received treatments including conservative management in 2, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in 2, percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in 11, laparoscope nephrolithotomy in 1 and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in 3. Complete stone clearance was achieved in 14 patients (73.7%). In addition, 3 patients had a history of failed ESWL. No obvious intraoperative or postoperative complications occurred. The results suggested that, for the treatment of CFRE with upper urinary tract calculi, conservative treatment and ESWL are insufficient. PCNL is a safe and effective treatment for renal calculus, and laparoscopic nephrolithotomy is an alternative choice for treating large or staghorn renal stones. RIRS may become the first line of treatment for renal stones (≤3.5 cm) due to its multiple merits, including higher stone-free rates, minimal invasion and fewer complications.

The efficacy of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for symptomatic ureteral stones: Predictors of treatment failure without the assistance of computed tomography.

ObjectivesNon-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) is not always performed clinically if the diagnosis of ureteral calculi has been confirmed using other radiographic imaging modalities. The aim of this study was to identify predictors of successful extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) without assistance of NCCT.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with symptomatic solitary ureteral stones who underwent ESWL between November 2015 and January 2016. Abdominal plain radiography or intravenous urography were performed before ESWL for localization. The exclusion criteria were repeated sessions of ESWL for the target stone and congenital genitourinary tract anomalies. The demographic characteristics, clinical history, medical charges, or imaging features of the stones were recorded. Successful treatment was defined as no fragments detected on radiography or ultrasonography in 4 weeks. For radiolucent calculi, successful treatment was regarded as cases without hydronephrosis, symptoms, or hematuria. Patients experiencing intractable pain and undergoing subsequent auxiliary surgeries were regarded as having ESWL treatment failure.ResultsAge (odds ratio [OR], 1.042; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.007–1.078), history of ipsilateral renal or ureteral calculi episodes (OR, 2.669; 95% CI, 1.281–5.687), stone burden (OR, 3.499; 95% CI, 1.284–9.530), and radiopaque stone (OR, 2.351; 95% CI, 1.049–5.267) were significant predictors of ESWL failure in all patients.ConclusionsFor treating symptomatic ureteral stones, those with smaller size, radiolucency, and without a history of ipsilateral renal or ureteral calculi could be considered for first-line therapy with ESWL.

Outcome of Pushback Stenting and ESWL Versus in Situ ESWL for Upper Ureteric Stone -A Comparative Study

Background: Urolithiasis is one of the most prevalent urological disorders and the prevalence of urinary stones has increased world wide1. The management of urinary calculi was revolutionized by the introduction of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) in 1980 and the first successful ESWL treatment was accomplished in Germany by Dr. Christian Chaussy using a Dornier HM1 lithotripter. ESWL is a safe, effective and non-invasive method2.Purpose: To observe the outcome of pushback stenting and ESWL versus in situ ESWL for upper ureteric stone.Materials and methods: It was a quasi-experimental study. The study was under went in the department of urology, Dhaka Medical College and Hospital, between July'2012 to June'2014. Total 60 patients of single upper ureteric stone who satisfy inclusion and exclusion criteria were enrolled in this study. Selected patients were dived into two groups, group A and group B. Group-A for pushback stenting and ESWL and group-B for in situ ESWL. Results were compared in terms of clearance rates, number of shock waves, sessions, incidence of complications and failure rate.Results: Failure of ESWL was significantly higher in Group B (23.33%) than Group A (10%). These results were statistically significant.Conclusion: Pushback stenting and ESWL is better than in situ ESWL for upper ureteric stone.KYAMC Journal Vol. 8, No.-1, Jul 2017, Page 4-9