[Update of the 2Sk guidelines on the diagnostics, treatment and metaphylaxis of urolithiasis (AWMF register number 043-025) : What is new?] / Aktualisierung der S2k-Leitlinie zur Diagnostik, Therapie und Metaphylaxe der Urolithiasis (AWMF Registernummer 043-025) : Was ist neu?

The increase of medical knowledge and technical innovations together with the demographic change represent a challenge for the new conception of guidelines and clinical studies. The present S2k guidelines, which are exclusively concerned with kidney and ureteral stones, should support the treatment of urolithiasis in hospitals and private practices and provide information on urolithiasis for patients. Increasing interdisciplinary collaboration in stone treatment is also demonstrated in the number of professional and working groups participating in the update of the new guidelines. The present S2k guidelines emerged from a consensus process and demonstrate the current recommendations in step with actual practice. They provide decision-making guidance for diagnostics, treatment and metaphylactic measures based on expert opinions and available published fundamental evidence from the literature.

[Retroperitoneoscopy to extract an amorphous matrix calculus of the right kidney]. / Retroperitoneoskopische Pyelotomie zur Extraktion eines amorphen Matrixausgusssteins der rechten Niere.

The female patient underwent multiple extracorporal shockwave treatments and an ureterorenoscopy during which an amorphous renal mass was found. A retroperitoneoscopy was performed with extraction of a large amorphous matrix calculus. Today, the prevalence of matrix calculi is very low. They are associated with and caused by urinal-infections. Delayed diagnosis in radiological-imaging procedures is typical for these stones. The minimal-invasive approach via retroperitoneoscopy seems to be an intriguing alternative to the established procedures like percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy.

[Individualized evidence-based interventional stone treatment : One stone, many question marks?] / Individualisierte evidenzbasierte interventionelle Steintherapie : Ein Stein, viele Fragezeichen?

The treatment of urolithiasis is still one of the most frequent tasks in the daily urological practice. Driven by the technological developments, patient demands and also personal experiences of urologists, many interventional treatment options have been established. To identify the most suitable treatment option, it is of utmost importance to consider not only stone size and localization but also the individual situation of the patient and the published evidence, which despite all efforts often lags behind the technical and clinical reality.

[S2k guidelines on diagnostics, therapy and metaphylaxis of urolithiasis (AWMF 043/025) : Compendium]. / S2k-Leitlinie zur Diagnostik, Therapie und Metaphylaxe der Urolithiasis (AWMF 043/025) : Kurzfassung.

Every tenth German citizen will suffer from at least one urinary calculus during the lifetime. The diagnostics, treatment and follow-up treatment of urolithiasis are, therefore, part of the daily routine practice for all urologists in hospitals and private practices as well as in many other disciplines, such as general practitioners, internists, nephrologists and pediatricians. Although the diagnostics and therapy have experienced substantial alterations over the last 10 years, the possibilities of metabolic diagnostics and secondary prevention for patients at risk are, unfortunately and unjustly, in many places very poorly represented. The present S2k guidelines, which for the first time were established in an interdisciplinary consensus process, represent the current practical recommendations and, whenever possible, use tables and algorithms in order to facilitate easy reference in the routine daily work. Last but not least, this greatly simplifies the measures for metaphylaxis.

[Current aspects of stone therapy]. / Aktuelle Aspekte der Steintherapie.

More than 30 % of all admissions to an urologic clinic are for the treatment of urinary stones. In almost all cases, the treatment is minimally invasive employing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), ureterorenoscopy (URS) or percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Technical advances in endourology and a growing expertise in ESWL led to a decline in ESWL and an increase in endoscopic techniques. In comparison with ESWL, the endoscopic techniques are more invasive but in most cases achieve a stone free state faster. With the introduction of diagnosis related groups (DRG), the economic aspect of stone therapy is gaining in importance. Stone prevention leads to a cost reduction in the health care system, justifying the use of an appropriate stone metaphylaxis. This review article presents the current recommendations for interventional urinary stone therapy and lists the options of conducting both medical and economically rational therapy.

[Simultaneous antegrade-retrograde therapy for renal calculi]. / Simultaneous antegrade-retrograde therapy for renal calculi [corrected].

The current guidelines recommend percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) as the first choice procedure for large stone masses. Complex stone situations, such as formed stones or large peripheral stone masses, however, often necessitate several access points and multiple stage procedures. In such cases open surgical stone removal is often used. An alternative is simultaneous antegrade-retrograde stone therapy in which PCNL is combined with flexible ureterorenoscopy (fURS). Both procedures complement each other in that fURS allows access to narrow calyces and PCNL the simple removal of buried concretions via the percutaneous shaft without excessive disintegration. Even difficult stone situations can be resolved simultaneously. Disadvantages are the high personnel and instrumental involvement (two endoscopic procedures with two endoscope towers and two operators) which is not adequately reflected in the diagnosis-related groups (DRG) remuneration system. Additionally simultaneous stone treatment is normally carried out in the supine lithotomy position so that even an experienced percutaneous surgeon is confronted with a new situation and a certain learning curve. Our own experiences and that of other working groups show, however, that the simultaneous approach represents an attractive and effective addition to minimally invasive stone therapy if the appropriate equipment and corresponding expertise are available.