REAL LIFE RETROGRADE FLEXIBLE URETERORENOSCOPY VERSUS EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCK WAVE LITHOTRIPSY IN PYELOCALICEAL STONES UNDER 20 MM

被引:0
|
作者
Radu, V. D. [1 ,2 ]
Costache, R. C. [1 ,2 ]
Onofrei, P. [3 ,4 ]
Novac, B. [1 ,2 ]
Bandac, Carina-Alexandra [2 ]
Arseni, D. [2 ]
Vaida, M. [5 ]
Ristescu, C. [2 ]
机构
[1] Grigore T Popa Univ Med & Pharm Iasi, Dept Surg Specialties II, Iasi, Romania
[2] CI Parhon Univ Hosp, Dept Urol & Renal Transplantat, Iasi, Romania
[3] Dept Morpho Funct Sci II, Dept Morpho Funct Sci 2, Iasi, Romania
[4] Elytis Hope Hosp, Dept Urol, Iasi, Romania
[5] Dr Iacob Czihac Clin Mil Emergency Hosp, Dept Urol, Iasi, Romania
来源
关键词
FURS; ESWL; STONE-FREE RATE; INTRARENAL SURGERY; URETEROSCOPY; COMPLICATIONS;
D O I
10.22551/MSJ.2024.03.10
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
The aim of our study was to highlight groups of patients with single pyelocaliceal stones less than 20 mm in whom flexible retrograde ureterorenoscopy (FURS) or extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) are superior in terms of stone-free rate and complications. Materials and methods: We formed two groups of patients, consisting of patients with single kidney stones under 20 mm in whom FURS was applied (the study group) and another in whom ESWL was performed (the control group). We compared the profile of the patients, the presence of double-J catheters before the procedure, the stone-free rate and the occurrence of complications. Results: Patients in the study group were older (p<0.001), had larger stones (p<0.001) and were more likely to have concomitant diseases (p<0.001). The stone-free rate in patients with stones up to 10 mm was similar in both groups (81.25% vs 78.94%, p=0.777), while for stones between 11 and 19 mm the stone-free rate was higher in the study group (77.77% vs 45.45%, p=0.008). The rate of complications was similar in both groups (p=0.555). Conclusions: FURS has superior efficacy compared to ESWL in patients with single kidney stones between 11 and 19 mm and similar efficacy in patients with single kidney stones up to 10 mm. The complication rate is low and similar in both groups.
引用
收藏
页码:525 / 534
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Flexible ureterorenoscopy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of lower pole stones of 10-20 mm
    El-Nahas, Ahmed R.
    Ibrahim, Hamdy M.
    Youssef, Ramy F.
    Sheir, Khaled Z.
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2012, 110 (06) : 898 - 902
  • [2] Flexible Ureterorenoscopy Versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for the Treatment of Renal Pelvis Stones of 10-20 mm in Obese Patients
    Javanmard, Babak
    Razaghi, Mohammad Reza
    Jafari, Anahita Ansari
    Mazloomfard, Mohammad Mohsen
    JOURNAL OF LASERS IN MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2015, 6 (04) : 162 - 166
  • [3] FLEXIBLE URETERORENOSCOPY VERSUS EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCKWAVE LITHOTRIPSY FOR TREATMENT OF LOWER POLE STONES OF 10-20 MM
    Resorlu, Berkan
    Unsal, Ali
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2012, 110 (02) : E5 - E5
  • [4] Treatment of Renal Stones ≥20 mm with Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy
    Wu, Haihu
    Wang, Jianwei
    Lu, Jiaju
    Wang, Yuqiu
    Niu, Zhihong
    UROLOGIA INTERNATIONALIS, 2016, 96 (01) : 99 - 105
  • [5] Flexible Ureterorenoscopy versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for the treatment of upper/middle calyx kidney stones of 10-20 mm: a retrospective analysis of 174 patients
    Cecen, Kursat
    Karadag, Mert Ali
    Demir, Aslan
    Bagcioglu, Murat
    Kocaaslan, Ramazan
    Sofikerim, Mustafa
    SPRINGERPLUS, 2014, 3 : 1 - 5
  • [6] Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus flexible ureterorenoscopy in the treatment of untreated renal calculi
    Fankhauser, Christian D.
    Hermanns, Thomas
    Lieger, Laura
    Diethelm, Olivia
    Umbehr, Martin
    Luginbuhl, Thomas
    Sulser, Tullio
    Muntener, Michael
    Poyet, Cedric
    CLINICAL KIDNEY JOURNAL, 2018, 11 (03) : 364 - 369
  • [8] Effectiveness of flexible ureteroscopy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for kidney stones treatment
    Ravier, E.
    Abid, N.
    Ruffion, A.
    Fassi-Fehri, H.
    Buron, C.
    Ganne, C.
    Mallet, A.
    Martin, X.
    PROGRES EN UROLOGIE, 2015, 25 (05): : 233 - 239
  • [9] Prospective comparison of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus flexible ureterorenoscopy in patients with non–lower pole kidney stones under the COVID-19 pandemic
    Song Bai
    Yunhong Zhan
    Chunyu Pan
    Gang Liu
    Jia Li
    Liping Shan
    Urolithiasis, 51
  • [10] Flexible Ureterorenoscopy versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for the treatment of upper/middle calyx kidney stones of 10-20 mm: a retrospective analysis of 174 patients (vol 3, 557, 2014)
    Cecen, Kursat
    Karadag, Mert Ali
    Demir, Aslan
    Bagcioglu, Murat
    Kocaaslan, Ramazan
    SPRINGERPLUS, 2016, 5