Stone-Free-Rate After Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy in the Management of Pediatric Renal Stones in Lower Pole and Other Locations - A Comparative Study.
نویسندگان
چکیده
OBJECTIVE To determine a difference in the stone-free-rate among different renal locations in children after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL). STUDY DESIGN A descriptive study. PLACE AND DURATION OF STUDY Urology Department, Shifa International Hospital, Islamabad, Pakistan, from January 2007 to June 2015. METHODOLOGY The study included children who underwent ESWL, divided into three groups based on location of stones in kidney as group A (lower pole stones), group B (upper and mid pole stones) and group C (renal pelvis stone), respectively. ESWL was done by standard technique using Storz Modulith SLX lithotripter 3rd generation. Data was collected by chart review. SPSS version 16 was used for data analysis. RESULTS Among 76 children with mean age of 7.55 ±4.16 years, 55 (72.4%) were males whereas 21 (27.6%) were females. Mean stone size was 1.08 ±0.59 cm. There were 34, 17 and 25 cases in groups A, B and C, respectively. Post- ESWL stone-free-rate was 47% in lower pole stones, 70.58% in upper and mid pole stones, and 68% in renal pelvis stones. Hematuria was seen in one patient from each group, sepsis in two patients from each of the mid pole/upper pole and lower pole group, while Steinstrasse in one patient from each group. CONCLUSION ESWL is a safe and effective way of treating renal stones in all poles in pediatric population.
منابع مشابه
Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy vs. percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs. flexible ureterorenoscopy for lower-pole stones
OBJECTIVES To review previous reports and discuss current trends in extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and ureterorenoscopy (URS). ESWL was recommended as the first-line treatment for small and intermediate-sized stones in the lower pole, while it is the standard treatment for large stones. However, the stone clearance rate after ESWL seems to be lo...
متن کاملEfficacy and cost-effectiveness of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for solitary lower pole renal calculi.
PURPOSE We determined the efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy monotherapy and compared its cost-effectiveness with percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the management of lower pole renal calculi. MATERIALS AND METHODS The efficacy (stone-free rates at 3-months posttreatment) of shock wave lithotripsy with the modified Dornier HM3* machine was determined retrospectively in 114 patien...
متن کاملIs flexible ureterorenoscopy and laser lithotripsy the new gold standard for lower pole renal stones when compared to shock wave lithotripsy: Comparative outcomes from a University hospital over similar time period.
INTRODUCTION Renal lower pole stones pose difficulty in management due to anatomical variation, stone size, hardness and patient demographics. Flexible ureterorenoscopy and laser lithotripsy (FURSL) and shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) are preferred for stones 1-2 cm in size. We wanted to compare the outcomes of FURSL and SWL for lower pole stones during the same time period. MATERIAL AND METHODS...
متن کاملThe efficacy of radiographic anatomical measurement methods in predicting success after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for lower pole kidney stones.
OBJECTIVES To assess the impact of lower pole calyceal anatomy on clearace of lower pole stones after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) by means of a new and previously defined radiographic measurement method. MATERIALS AND METHODS Sixty-four patients with solitary radiopaque lower pole kidney stones were enrolled in the study. Infundibulopelvic angle (IPA), infundibulotransverse an...
متن کاملCost-effectiveness and efficiency of shockwave lithotripsy vs flexible ureteroscopic holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser lithotripsy in the treatment of lower pole renal calculi.
UNLABELLED What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Stone management economics is a complex issue. FURS and SWL are recognised treatment option for lower pole kidney stones. There are paucity of data comparing cost implication and effectiveness of both treatment options. Both treatment modalities are equally efficacious. FURS incurred greater cost burden compared to SWL in the ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons--Pakistan : JCPSP
دوره 26 11 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2016