Role of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in Management of Upper Ureteric Stones

Introduction: The treatment options for upper ureteric stones range from open surgeries to minimally invasive and non invasive techniques. Presently the two most frequently used options for upper ureteric calculi that require intervention are extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and ureteror...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: R. Batra, P. Batra, P. Bokariya, R. Kothari
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SpringerOpen 2018-09-01
Series:African Journal of Urology
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110570418300572
_version_ 1819211467454414848
author R. Batra
P. Batra
P. Bokariya
R. Kothari
author_facet R. Batra
P. Batra
P. Bokariya
R. Kothari
author_sort R. Batra
collection DOAJ
description Introduction: The treatment options for upper ureteric stones range from open surgeries to minimally invasive and non invasive techniques. Presently the two most frequently used options for upper ureteric calculi that require intervention are extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and ureterorenoscopy (URS) with contact lithotripsy applied by attaining endoscopic access to the calculi. Objective: The objective of this study is meant to evaluate ESWL in the treatment of upper ureteric stones ≤2 cm in terms of stone free rates, complications and procedure time. Patients and method: Seventy six patients were subjected to ESWL as primary modality for treatment of upper ureteric stone. ESWL group had mean stone size of 10.58 mm. The stone free rate was 93.4% for ESWL. The sample size was adequate as it was determined by statistician by applying pertinent formulas. Results: It was observed that the stone free rate in ESWL group was higher (97.7%) when the stone size was ≤10 mm and when the duration of symptoms was <1 month. ESWL was advantageous in terms of procedural time with no requirement of anaesthesia. The complications in ESWL were minor in nature and were not statistically significant. Conclusion: In conclusion, this study shows that ESWL is an important modality in treating upper ureteric calculi ≤2 cm in size and we strongly recommend ESWL as the first choice of procedure in solitary upper ureteric calculi ≤10 mm size. Keywords: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, Ureterorenoscopy, Upper ureteric calculus
first_indexed 2024-12-23T06:27:32Z
format Article
id doaj.art-4b349b93e6c84305ae2d51f07cc92837
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1110-5704
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-23T06:27:32Z
publishDate 2018-09-01
publisher SpringerOpen
record_format Article
series African Journal of Urology
spelling doaj.art-4b349b93e6c84305ae2d51f07cc928372022-12-21T17:57:00ZengSpringerOpenAfrican Journal of Urology1110-57042018-09-01243186190Role of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in Management of Upper Ureteric StonesR. Batra0P. Batra1P. Bokariya2R. Kothari3Department of Urology, M. M. Institute of Medical Science and Research Mulana, Haryana, IndiaDepartment of Surgery, M. M. Institute of Medical Science and Research Mulana, Haryana, India; Corresponding author.Department of Anatomy, Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Sevagram, IndiaDepartment of Physiology, Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Sevagram, IndiaIntroduction: The treatment options for upper ureteric stones range from open surgeries to minimally invasive and non invasive techniques. Presently the two most frequently used options for upper ureteric calculi that require intervention are extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and ureterorenoscopy (URS) with contact lithotripsy applied by attaining endoscopic access to the calculi. Objective: The objective of this study is meant to evaluate ESWL in the treatment of upper ureteric stones ≤2 cm in terms of stone free rates, complications and procedure time. Patients and method: Seventy six patients were subjected to ESWL as primary modality for treatment of upper ureteric stone. ESWL group had mean stone size of 10.58 mm. The stone free rate was 93.4% for ESWL. The sample size was adequate as it was determined by statistician by applying pertinent formulas. Results: It was observed that the stone free rate in ESWL group was higher (97.7%) when the stone size was ≤10 mm and when the duration of symptoms was <1 month. ESWL was advantageous in terms of procedural time with no requirement of anaesthesia. The complications in ESWL were minor in nature and were not statistically significant. Conclusion: In conclusion, this study shows that ESWL is an important modality in treating upper ureteric calculi ≤2 cm in size and we strongly recommend ESWL as the first choice of procedure in solitary upper ureteric calculi ≤10 mm size. Keywords: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, Ureterorenoscopy, Upper ureteric calculushttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110570418300572
spellingShingle R. Batra
P. Batra
P. Bokariya
R. Kothari
Role of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in Management of Upper Ureteric Stones
African Journal of Urology
title Role of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in Management of Upper Ureteric Stones
title_full Role of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in Management of Upper Ureteric Stones
title_fullStr Role of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in Management of Upper Ureteric Stones
title_full_unstemmed Role of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in Management of Upper Ureteric Stones
title_short Role of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in Management of Upper Ureteric Stones
title_sort role of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in management of upper ureteric stones
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110570418300572
work_keys_str_mv AT rbatra roleofextracorporealshockwavelithotripsyinmanagementofupperuretericstones
AT pbatra roleofextracorporealshockwavelithotripsyinmanagementofupperuretericstones
AT pbokariya roleofextracorporealshockwavelithotripsyinmanagementofupperuretericstones
AT rkothari roleofextracorporealshockwavelithotripsyinmanagementofupperuretericstones