Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Does previous extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy affect the performance and outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy?
J Urol. 2009 Feb; 181(2):663-7.JU

Abstract

PURPOSE

ESWL and percutaneous nephrolithotomy are the primary treatment modalities for kidney stones. Furthermore, percutaneous nephrolithotomy is first line treatment when ESWL fails. We assessed how previous ESWL affects the performance and outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 1,008 patients underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy between 2002 and 2007, of whom 230 (22.8%) had a recent history of failed ESWL. Patient characteristics, operative findings, success and complication rates in patients with and without a history of ESWL were analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

In the post-ESWL group mean stone size was significantly lower and the mean +/- SD interval between the last ESWL session and percutaneous nephrolithotomy was 3.4 +/- 2.1 months (range 1 to 12). Mean operative time and fluoroscopic screening time were similar in the 2 groups (p >0.05). However, mean operative time per cm(2) stone and fluoroscopic screening time per cm(2) stone were significantly prolonged in the post-ESWL group (p <0.05). At a mean followup of 5.6 +/- 1.2 months (range 3 to 6) an overall success rate of 89% was achieved. Success and complication rates were comparable in the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Although similar success and complication rates were achieved with percutaneous nephrolithotomy after failed ESWL, percutaneous nephrolithotomy is usually more difficult with prolonged operative time and fluoroscopic screening time per cm(2) stone due to the tissue effects of ESWL and scattered stone fragments in the pelvicaliceal system.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Urology, Haseki Teaching and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

19091339

Citation

Yuruk, Emrah, et al. "Does Previous Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy Affect the Performance and Outcome of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy?" The Journal of Urology, vol. 181, no. 2, 2009, pp. 663-7.
Yuruk E, Tefekli A, Sari E, et al. Does previous extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy affect the performance and outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy? J Urol. 2009;181(2):663-7.
Yuruk, E., Tefekli, A., Sari, E., Karadag, M. A., Tepeler, A., Binbay, M., & Muslumanoglu, A. Y. (2009). Does previous extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy affect the performance and outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy? The Journal of Urology, 181(2), 663-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.10.016
Yuruk E, et al. Does Previous Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy Affect the Performance and Outcome of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy. J Urol. 2009;181(2):663-7. PubMed PMID: 19091339.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Does previous extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy affect the performance and outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy? AU - Yuruk,Emrah, AU - Tefekli,Ahmet, AU - Sari,Erhan, AU - Karadag,Mert Ali, AU - Tepeler,Abdulkadir, AU - Binbay,Murat, AU - Muslumanoglu,Ahmet Yaser, Y1 - 2008/12/16/ PY - 2008/05/26/received PY - 2008/12/19/entrez PY - 2008/12/19/pubmed PY - 2009/2/5/medline SP - 663 EP - 7 JF - The Journal of urology JO - J. Urol. VL - 181 IS - 2 N2 - PURPOSE: ESWL and percutaneous nephrolithotomy are the primary treatment modalities for kidney stones. Furthermore, percutaneous nephrolithotomy is first line treatment when ESWL fails. We assessed how previous ESWL affects the performance and outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 1,008 patients underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy between 2002 and 2007, of whom 230 (22.8%) had a recent history of failed ESWL. Patient characteristics, operative findings, success and complication rates in patients with and without a history of ESWL were analyzed and compared. RESULTS: In the post-ESWL group mean stone size was significantly lower and the mean +/- SD interval between the last ESWL session and percutaneous nephrolithotomy was 3.4 +/- 2.1 months (range 1 to 12). Mean operative time and fluoroscopic screening time were similar in the 2 groups (p >0.05). However, mean operative time per cm(2) stone and fluoroscopic screening time per cm(2) stone were significantly prolonged in the post-ESWL group (p <0.05). At a mean followup of 5.6 +/- 1.2 months (range 3 to 6) an overall success rate of 89% was achieved. Success and complication rates were comparable in the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although similar success and complication rates were achieved with percutaneous nephrolithotomy after failed ESWL, percutaneous nephrolithotomy is usually more difficult with prolonged operative time and fluoroscopic screening time per cm(2) stone due to the tissue effects of ESWL and scattered stone fragments in the pelvicaliceal system. SN - 1527-3792 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/19091339/Does_previous_extracorporeal_shock_wave_lithotripsy_affect_the_performance_and_outcome_of_percutaneous_nephrolithotomy L2 - https://www.jurology.com/doi/full/10.1016/j.juro.2008.10.016?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&amp;rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&amp;rfr_dat=cr_pub=pubmed DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -