Bilateral ureteral stones; factors affecting treatment decision.

AIM: To evaluate certain factors that may affect the decision-making process for the rational management approach in cases presenting with bilateral ureteral stones. METHODS: A total of 153 patients presenting with bilateral ureteral stones from 6 centers were evaluated and divided in three groups. Group 1 (n:21) Patients undergoing DJ stent insertion in one ureter and ureterorenoscopic (URS) lithotripsy for the contralateral ureteral stone. Group 2 (n:91), URS lithotripsy for both ureteral stones and Group 3 (n:41) patients undergoing bilateral DJ stent insertion. The outcomes of the procedures and the relevant patient as well as stone related factors have been comparatively evaluated in three groups. RESULTS: While associated UTI rates and serum creatinine levels were significantly higher in bilateral DJ group, previous URS history was found to be significantly higher in cases undergoing bilateral URS than those undergoing bilateral DJ stenting. URS was performed significantly more often in cases with lower ureteral stones and DJ stenting seems to be more rational approach in upper ureteral stones. In patients with lower ureteral stones, larger and harder stones, endourologists tended to perform URS as the first option. CONCLUSIONS: Decision making for a rational approach in cases with bilateral ureteral stones my be challenging. Our findings demonstated that serum creatinine levels, associated UTI, location and the hardness of the stone and previous ureteroscopy anamnesis could be important factors in making a decision between JJ stenting and ureteroscopic stone extraction in emergency conditions.

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus laser lithotripsy in the treatment of post-SWL steinstrasse: a randomized comparative study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of Holmium laser lithotripsy with that of extracorporeal shock lithotripsy (SWL) for post-SWL ureteral steinstrasse. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 2022 to July 2023, 36 patients with post-SWL ureteral steinstrasse were randomly divided into laser lithotripsy and SWL groups. Patients with pain, moderate to marked hydronephrosis, large leading stone fragments, and showing no spontaneous resolution within 3-4 weeks after medical expulsive therapy were included. Patients with sepsis were excluded. The success rate was the primary outcome. We compared the perioperative data between the groups. RESULTS: The success rate was higher in the ureteroscopy group than in the SWL group (p = 0.034). SWL was a significantly longer operation, and the fluoroscopy time was significantly longer in the SWL group than in the URS group (p = 0.027). Auxiliary procedures were more frequently performed in the SWL group than in the URS group (p = 0.02). JJ stents were inserted in 100% of patients in the URS group. Three patients (16.7%) underwent conversion to laser ureteroscopy after the second SWL session failed. No significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications was observed between the groups, but the incidence of postoperative LUT was high in the ureteroscopy group. The mean hospital stay was 30 h in the ureteroscopy group. SWL was performed without the need for hospital admission. CONCLUSION: Ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy for steinstrasse was safe and effective, with a higher success rate, shorter fluoroscopy time, and shorter recovery period than SWL.

The association between renal pelvis urine density and the risk of severe infectious complications in patient with symptom-free hydronephrosis after shock wave lithotripsy: a multi-center prospective study.

Finding reliable and easy-to-obtain predictors of severe infectious complications after shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) is a major clinical need, particular in symptom-free hydronephrosis. Therefore, we aim to prospectively investigate the predictive value of Hounsfield units (HU) in renal pelvis urine for the risk of severe infectious complications in patients with ureteral stones and symptom-free hydronephrosis after SWL. This multi-center prospective study was conducted from June 2020 to December 2023. The HU of renal pelvis urine was measured by non-enhanced computed tomography. The severe infectious complications included systemic inflammatory response syndrome, sepsis, and septic shock. Binary logistic regression models assessed the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Finally, 1,436 patients with ureteral stones were enrolled in this study. 8.9% (128/1,436) of patients experienced severe infectious complications after SWL treatment. After adjusting confounding variables, compared with the patients in the lowest renal pelvis urine density quartile, the OR (95% CI) for the highest quartile was 32.36 (13.32, 78.60). There was a positive linear association between the HU value of renal pelvis urine and the risk of severe infectious complications after SWL (P for trend < 0.001). Furthermore, this association was also observed stratified by age, gender, BMI, stone size, stone location and hydronephrosis grade (all P for interaction > 0.05). Additionally, the nonlinear association employed by restricted cubic splines is not statistically significant (nonlinear P = 0.256). The AUROC and 95%CI of renal pelvis urine density were 0.895 (0.862 to 0.927, P value < 0.001). The cut-off value was 12.0 HU with 78.59% sensitivity and 85.94% specificity. This multi-center prospective study demonstrated a positive linear association between HU in renal pelvis urine and the risk of severe infectious complications in patients with ureteral stones and symptom-free hydronephrosis after SWL, regardless of age, gender, BMI, stone size, stone location, and hydronephrosis grade. These findings might be helpful in the SWL treatment decision-making process.

Area of hydronephrosis is a useful predictive factor of impacted ureteral stones.

Ureteroscopic lithotripsy for impacted stones is challenging, but it is important to predict impacted stones preoperatively. Hydronephrosis, which is evaluated by a grading system, is often apparent in impacted stones. However, the currently used grading system is a qualitative evaluation. We, therefore, focused on a quantitative evaluation: the area of hydronephrosis. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the area of hydronephrosis could predict impacted stones more accurately than Society for Fetal Urology grade. We retrospectively identified 160 patients who underwent ureteroscopic lithotripsy for ureteral stones at our hospital between January 2014 and April 2022. Impacted stones were defined as stones fixed to the ureteral wall that could not be moved by means of ureteroscopic manipulation or water pressure. Of the 160 patients, 54 (33.8%) had impacted stones. Comparing patient characteristics, there were significant differences in stone size, ureteral wall thickness, Society for Fetal Urology grade, renal pelvic width and area of hydronephrosis (all P < 0.01). Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed that area of hydronephrosis was the more significant predictive value (area under the curve 0.781) compared with Society for Fetal Urology grade (area under the curve 0.676, P < 0.01). Multivariate analysis revealed that significant independent predictive factors of impacted stones were thicker ureteral wall thickness and larger area of hydronephrosis (both P < 0.01). The area of hydronephrosis and ureteral wall thickness were significant predictors of impacted stones in patients undergoing ureteroscopic lithotripsy for ureteral stones. These factors may be useful for selecting the treatment and preoperative settings.

[Comprehensive comparative assessment of the results of treatment of patients with ureteral stones using two different methods].

AIM: To improve treatment outcomes in patients with ureteral stones by optimizing the use of noninvasive and minimally invasive techniques. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective analysis of 186 patients with ureteral stones who were treated at the "RSSPMCU" in the period from July 2020 to April 2023 was carried out. Among them, 84 were undergone to electromagnetic extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) using the Storz Modulith SLX-F2 device (Switzerland). A procedure was performed under ataralgesia. The mean stone size was 8.54+/-2.79 (4-16 mm). The average amount of shock waves per stone was 2436+/-247.78. The session duration was 19.37+/-1.86 minutes. Endoscopic procedures were performed in 102 patients. Among them, 49 stones were removed using the ureteroscopy (URS), while in 49 and 4 cases percutaneous access (PCNL) and a combination of PCNL and URS under spinal anesthesia were done, respectively. The mean stone size was 11.46+/-4.26 (5-26 mm). Holmium laser or pneumatic lithotripsy was performed. The duration of the procedure was 63.38+/-17.48 min. RESULTS: The stone density of patients undergoing ESWL was 855+/-319.84 HU, while those undergoing endoscopic procedures was 943.78+/-319.48 HU (p>0.05). The absorbed dose with ESWL was 18.73+/-4.15 mGy compared to 31.42+/-1.40 mGy for endoscopic procedures (p<0.001). A length of stay was 1.0+/-0.0 and 2.75+0.1, respectively (p<0.001). After 7-10 days, the stone free rate (SFR) was 76.2% (n=64) after ESWL and 99.02% (n=101) after endoscopic interventions (p<0.05). In the ESWL group, 3 patients received second session of ESWL for residual stones and in 9 cases URS was done. The SFR was 100% on day 45. In patients after endoscopic interventions, 1 patient underwent URS and SFR was 100% on the 15th day. CONCLUSION: In general, the endoscopic technique is superior to ESWL in patients with ureteral stones both in terms of SFR and duration of procedure, but is inferior in safety due to invasiveness and the absorbed dose. In our opinion, the key indication for endoscopic treatment should be stone size greater than 6 mm, density more than 1000 HU, and patient preference.

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: retrospective study on possible predictors of treatment success and revisiting the role of non-contrast-enhanced computer tomography in kidney and ureteral stone disease.

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is a safe and efficient treatment option for urinary stone disease. The overall stone-free rate (SFR) varies significantly. This study aimed to assess the influence of stone size, location, stone density, and skin-to-stone distance (SSD), on the outcome of ESWL. We assessed whether pre-treatment non-contrast-enhanced CT scan (NCCT) confers significant advantages compared to kidney-ureter-bladder film (KUB) only. We reviewed the medical records of 307 cases (165 men, 142 women) with renal and ureteral stones treated consecutively at our institution with ESWL between 2020 and 2023. 44 of these underwent a NCCT. The outcome of ESWL was defined in two ways: visible stone fragmentation on KUB, and the need for further treatment. Overall success of fragmentation was 85% (261 patients). 61% of patients (n = 184) didn't need any further treatment. Stone size and location correlated significantly with treatment outcomes regarding the need for further treatment (p = 0.004) and stone fragmentation (p = 0.016), respectively. Unlike mean SSD (p = 0.462), the mean attenuation value (MAV) significantly correlated with the need for retreatment (p = 0.016). MAV seems to be a better predictor of treatment success (AUC of the ROC curve: 0.729), compared to stone size (AUC: 0.613). The difference between groups (with and without NCCT) in both treatment outcomes did not reach statistical significance. During decision-making, information regarding SSD and MAV can be useful in more dubious scenarios. However, it appears that their inclusion doesn't provide substantial advantages when compared to relying solely on KUB.

Can shear wave elastography predict the success of shock­wave lithotripsy used in renal stones treatment? A prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the usage of shear wave elastography (SWE) in the prediction of the success rate of shock­wave lithotripsy (SWL) treatment of renal stones. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the present study, SWL was performed for 100 patients presented with renal stones in the duration from May 2022 to August 2023. The patients were divided into 2 groups SWL responders and non-responders. The study compared between the 2 groups in terms of baseline parameters of the patients as age, sex, body mass index (BMI), stone size, stone location, stone density (HU), skin-to-stone distance (SSD), the degree of hydronephrosis and the stone elastography values. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant relation between stone-free rate and degree of obstruction (p = 0.628), stone size (p = 0.390) upper calyceal location (p = 0.17), middle calyceal location (p = 0.66), and renal pelvis location (p = 1.0). Nevertheless, a statistically significant relation was found as regards lower calyceal location, stone density (HU), and stone Elastography values using multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Measurement of stone density by shear wave elastography (SWE) can be used as an alternative to HU in decision-making before SWL. SWL success depends mainly on stone site, HU, and SWE values.

Ureteral wall thickness as a predictor for non-invasive treatment success for steinstrasse. Can we save time?

PURPOSE: We aimed to define factors affecting the non-invasive overall treatment success (medical expulsive therapy (MET) ± shock wave lithotripsy (SWL)) for uncomplicated ureteral steinstrasse (SS) clearance. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated consecutive patients who underwent SWL for renal stones between 2017 and 2021. Patients with uncomplicated SS were included. All patient's demographic and radiological data, e.g., age, gender, pre-SWL stenting, SS site, type, leading stone size in widest diameter (< 10 mm and ≥ 10 mm), ureteral wall thickness (UWT) in mm against the leading stone were collected. If SS was diagnosed, medical treatment was given for 4 weeks. In case of MET failure, either SWL for the leading stones + MET or direct URS was done. Non-invasive treatment success (SFR) was considered if complete clearance of SS occurred with no complications or the need for invasive intervention. RESULTS: A total of 145 patients were included with mean age of 45.9 ± 12.4 years. SFR in case of MET only occurred in 27.9%. Complications happened in 26 patients (17.9%). Non-invasive treatment SFR was achieved in 78 patients (53.8%) totally where SS type I, leading stone size ≤ 10 mm type and decreased UWT around the leading stone increased treatment success. CONCLUSION: Ureteral wall thickness is an important factor predicting SS management success. Besides the decreased UWT, non-invasive management should be offered for type I SS with leading stone ≤ 10 mm.

Comparison of ureteral stone measurements for predicting the efficacy of a single session of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: one-, two-, and three-dimensional computed tomography measurements.

The objective of this study was to compare the value of one-, two- and three-dimensional computed tomography (CT) measurements for predicting the efficacy of a single session of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in patients with a single ureteral stone. A total of 165 patients were included based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Different models were constructed using a combination of patients' clinical data and measurements obtained by manual sketching and automated extraction software. Multivariate logistic regression was used to develop the models. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to assess the performance of the models. There was good interobserver agreement for all measurements in different dimensions (P < 0.001). We also found that hydronephrosis, the largest diameter, the largest area, volume, and mean CT value were significantly greater in the failure group than in the success group (P < 0.01). Furthermore, all sizes and CT measurement values were found to be independent predictors for predicting efficacy after one session of ESWL (P < 0.05). In addition, the multivariate logistic analysis showed that the area under the curve (AUC) for two-dimensional and three-dimensional measurements was superior to that of one-dimensional measurement (P < 0.01). However, when size alone was included as a measurable predictor, there was no significant difference in the AUC among the one-, two-, and three-dimensional measurements (P > 0.05). In summary, after adjusting for clinical data, two- and three-dimensional measurements combining ureteral stone size and CT values were found to be the best predictors of ESWL efficacy, and software-based three-dimensional measurements should be considered to avoid interobserver variability in clinical practice.

Predictors for emergency readmission in patients with ureteral calculi: a focus on pain management and stone location.

BACKGROUND: The management of patients with ureteral calculi in the emergency department (ED) remains challenging due to high revisit rates. PURPOSE: To identify predictors of revisits among patients with ureteral calculi in the ED. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data from patients who presented at a tertiary academic hospital in Seoul, Republic of Korea, between February 2018 and December 2019, were analyzed retrospectively. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Variables, including the respiratory rate (RR), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), duration of pain, number of analgesic doses, location of ureteral calculi, and ED length of stay (LOS) were examined using logistic regression. We also examined some additional variables included in the STONE and CHOKAI scoring systems to examine their association with revisit. RESULTS: Significant predictors of revisits included the number of analgesic doses and the location of ureteral calculi. Patients who required multiple analgesic doses or those with proximal or mid-ureteral calculi were more likely to revisit the ED. Although the STONE and CHOKAI scores could predict uncomplicated ureteral calculi, we found that the CHOKAI score is a valuable tool for predicting the likelihood of patient revisits (p = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: Effective pain management and consideration of calculi location are important for predicting patient revisits. More research is required to validate findings, develop precise predictive models, and empower tailored care for high-risk patients. In patients with ureteral calculi in the ED, the number of analgesics given and stone location predict return visits. Proximal ureteral calculi on CT may require early urologic intervention to prevent pain-related revisits.

Preference for diagnosing and treating renal colic during pregnancy: a survey among Chinese urologists.

To explore the preference for diagnosing and treating renal colic during pregnancy among Chinese urologists. A questionnaire was designed using the Sojump® platform. WeChat, the largest social networking platform in China, was used to distribute the questionnaire to urologists at hospitals of all levels in China. In total, 110 responses were included. Of the respondents, 100.0% used ultrasound to diagnose renal colic during pregnancy, followed by magnetic resonance imaging (17.3%) and low-dose CT (3.6%). Phloroglucinol (80.9%) and progesterone (72.7%) were the most commonly used antispasmodics and analgesics. Opioid analgesics were not commonly used (12.7%). Most of the respondents (63.6%) indicated that no more than 20% of the patients needed surgical intervention. If surgery was unavoidable, 95.5% preferred temporary renal drainage, including ureteral stenting (92.7%) and percutaneous nephrostomy (2.7%). However, some respondents still preferred definitive stone treatment, such as ureteroscopy lithotripsy (3.6%) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (0.9%). Moreover, there were no differences in the choices of urologists with different professional titles regarding diagnostic tools, most therapeutic medications, or surgical methods (p > 0.05). Ultrasound is the preferred tool for diagnosing renal colic during pregnancy. Low-dose CT is still not widely accepted. Pregnant patients with renal colic are initially treated conservatively. Urologists prefer ureteral stenting when there are clinical indications for intervention.

Thulium Fiber Laser Versus Holmium:Yttrium Aluminum Garnet for Lithotripsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Thulium fiber laser (TFL) emerged as a competitor of holmium:yttrium aluminum garnet (Ho:YAG) laser for the treatment of urinary stones. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy between Ho:YAG and TFL for laser lithotripsy of renal and ureteral stones. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A literature search was conducted using PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases to identify reports published until May 2023. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were followed to identify eligible studies. The primary outcome was to compare the stone-free rate (SFR) between Ho:YAG and TFL for laser lithotripsy. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Eleven studies met our inclusion criteria, and data from 1286 and 880 patients who underwent, respectively, Ho:YAG and TFL laser lithotripsy were reviewed. Most studies included ureteroscopy (URS) and retrograde intrarenal surgeries as procedures, two included percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and one included URS exclusively. Only two studies reported results in pediatric patients. TFL was associated with a higher SFR (odds ratio [OR] 1.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06-3.20; p = 0.031) when no residual fragment is considered, but not when SFR refers to the presence of fragments <3 mm (OR 2.48, 95% CI: 0.98-6.29; p = 0.055) or when only Ho:YAG with MOSES is considered (p = 0.068). According to the stones' location, TFL was associated with higher SFRs than Ho:YAG for renal (OR 3.14, 95% CI: 1.69-5.86; p < 0.001) but not for ureteral (p = 0.8) stones. TFL was associated with a lower intraoperative complication rate (OR 0.34, 95% CI: 0.19-0.63; p < 0.001). No difference was found in major (p = 0.4) or overall (p = 0.4) complication rate, operative time (p = 0.051), and laser time (p = 0.9). CONCLUSIONS: TFL is a promising laser for the treatment of urinary stones with some advantages over Ho:YAG. Further high-quality studies are needed to confirm these findings and optimize the surgical settings. PATIENT SUMMARY: The use of thulium fiber laser rather than holmium:yttrium aluminum garnet permits to reach a higher stone-free rate in stones located in the kidney rather than in the ureter.

Comparison of Outcomes of Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy with Ureteroscopic Lasertripsy for Management of Proximal Ureteral Stones.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy with ureterorenoscopy and lasertripsy for managing upper ureteral stones of size 10mm to 15mm. STUDY DESIGN: Observational, cross-sectional study. Place and Duration of the Study: Department of Urology, Sindh Institute of Urology and Transplantation (SIUT), from December 2020 to December 2021. METHODOLOGY: A total of 168 patients with the diagnosis of proximal ureteric stone of size 1-1.5 cm were enrolled for this study. Patients were divided into two groups by simple random method. Group 1 patients underwent ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URS) and lasertripsy while Group 2 patients were subjected to extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL). Patients' demography, operative time, duration of hospitalisation, complication rate and stone-free rates, were recorded for both groups. Frequency and percentages were calculated for categorical variables and mean and standard deviation were calculated for continuous variables. For comparison of continuous variables, one-way ANOVA was applied, and Chi-square test was applied to compare the categorical variables. The p-value ≤0.05 was taken as significant. RESULTS: The mean age was of 39.55 ± 14.06 years, with the majority falling within the age group of 26 to 40 years. There were more males (116, 69%) than females (52, 31%). Most of the patients did not have a history of diabetes or hypertension. Sixty-two patients had previous history of stones. The average duration of ureteric stone disease was 3.18 ± 3.14 months. The mean size of the ureteric stone was 10.82 ± 3.19mm. The procedure duration was significantly shorter for URS, as compared to ESWL (33.81 ± 15.42 minutes vs. 45.00 ± 0.00 minutes, p=<0.01. The overall stone clearance rate was significantly higher after URS (83.3%) as compared to ESWL (64.2%, p=0.05). CONCLUSION: URS was a superior treatment option as compared to ESWL. However, the selection of the most appropriate procedure should be based on a tailored approach considering the patient's preference and the size of the stones. KEY WORDS: Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL), Ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URS), Modified clavien classification system (MCCS), Ureteric stone.

Application of novel burst wave lithotripsy and ultrasonic propulsion technology for the treatment of ureteral calculi in a bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) and renal calculi in a harbor seal (Phoca vitulina).

Marine mammals may develop kidney stones, which can be challenging to treat. We describe burst wave lithotripsy (BWL) and ultrasonic propulsion to treat ureteral calculi in a 48-year-old female bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) and to reduce renal stone burden in a 23-year-old male harbor seal (Phoca vitulina). BWL and ultrasonic propulsion were delivered transcutaneously in sinusoidal ultrasound bursts to fragment and reposition stones. Targeting and monitoring were performed with real-time imaging integrated within the BWL system. Four dolphin stones were obtained and fragmented ex vivo. The dolphin case received a 10-min and a 20-min BWL treatment conducted approximately 24 h apart to treat two 8-10 mm partially obstructing right mid-ureteral stones, using oral sedation alone. For the harbor seal, while under general anesthesia, retrograde ureteroscopy attempts were unsuccessful because of ureteral tortuosity, and a 30-min BWL treatment was targeted on one 10-mm right kidney stone cluster. All 4 stones fragmented completely to < 2-mm fragments in < 20 min ex vivo. In the dolphin case, the ureteral stones appeared to fragment, spread apart, and move with ultrasonic propulsion. On post-treatment day 1, the ureteral calculi fragments shifted caudally reaching the ureteral orifice on day 9. On day 10, the calculi fragments passed, and the hydroureter resolved. In the harbor seal, the stone cluster was observed to fragment and was not visible on the post-operative computed tomography scan. The seal had gross hematuria and a day of behavior indicating stone passage but overall, an uneventful recovery. BWL and ultrasonic propulsion successfully relieved ureteral stone obstruction in a geriatric dolphin and reduced renal stone burden in a geriatric harbor seal.

Outcomes of primary ureteroscopic lithotripsy: The role of maximum ureteral wall thickness at the site of stone impaction.

OBJECTIVES: To verify if the maximum thickness of the ureteral wall at the stone site (m-UWT) can affect the outcomes of primary retrograde ureteroscopic lithotripsy (P-URSL) within a single-center dataset. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data on 354 consecutive URSL performed from January 2020 to May 2022 at "Fondazione Poliambulanza" in Brescia (Italy). We included patients older than 18 years who underwent URSL for a single ureteral stone with a maximum diameter ranging from 5 to 10 mm. Patients with anatomical abnormalities, a positive preoperative urinary culture, or without a NCCT performed during the acute event were excluded. Patients were treated in an emergency setting (P-URSL within 48 h from the diagnosis of acute ureteral colic) or in a delayed one (D-URSL after a period of maximum 90 days of ureteral double-j stenting). For the resulting 139 patients we recorded demographic, clinical and stone-related features and perioperative data. We processed these data by univariate and multivariate analysis, and with a logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 139 included procedures, 63 were P-URSL and 76 D-URSL. At the univariate analysis we found that stone diameter (OR 0.845, p = 0.017), stone volume (OR 0.023, p = 0.001), stone density (OR 0.998, p = 0.000) and m-UWT (OR 0.499, p = 0.013) are predictors of P-URSL. Stone density (OR 0.998, p = 0.002) is an independent predictor of P-URSL at the multivariate analysis. At a logistic regression analysis, a distal ureteric position (OR 0.189, p = 0.014), stone diameter (OR 1.289, p = 0.006), and m-UWT (OR 2.297, p = 0.02) were found to be statistically significant predictors of incomplete stone clearance in patients undergoing P-URSL. m-UWT is the only predictor of short-term postoperative adverse events in patients undergoing P-URSL (OR 3.386, p < 0.001). From a descriptive analysis, it emerged that an increased m-UWT (>2 mm) significantly correlates to an endoscopic finding of ureteritis' signs and to an increase in operative time, hospital stay and post-procedural stenting time. A m-UWT greater than 2 mm also correlates with a lower stone free rate (SFR) and with a significant increase in both short and long-term postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirmed a connection between m-UWT and poor endoscopic findings, as well as a direct correlation with the main morphometric parameters of the stone and finally with the outcomes of P-URSL itself. Further studies are necessary to validate our results, so that m-UWT might be routinely considered a useful tool in the decision-making process for P-URSL.

Is extracorporeal lithotripsy a first-line treatment for urinary stones today?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and complications of extracorporeal lithotripsy (SWL) as a first-line treatment for renal and ureteral stones METHODS: Retrospective and observational study of all the patients treated with lithotripsy in a third level center between January 2014 and January 2021; characteristics of the patients, the stones, complications and results of SWL is recollected. Multivariate logistic regression of the factors associated with stone size reduction was performed. A statistical analysis of the factors associated with additional treatment after SWL and factors associated with complications is also executed. RESULTS: 1727 patients are included. Stone mean size was 9,5mm. 1540 (89.4%) patients presented reduction in stone size. In multivariate analysis, stone size (OR=1.13; p=0.00), ureteral location of the lithiasis (OR=1.15; p=0.052) and number of waves (p=0.002; OR=1.00) used in SWL are the factors associated with reduction of stone size. Additional treatment after lithotripsy was needed in 665 patients (38.5%). The factors associated with the need for retreatment were stone size (OR=1.131; p=0.000), number of waves (OR=1.000; p=0.000), energy (OR=1.005; p=0.000). 153 patients (8.8%) suffered complications after SWL. A statistically significant association was found between the size of the lithiasis (p=0.024, OR=1.054) and the previous urinary diversion (P=0.004, OR=0.571). CONCLUSION: Lithotripsy remains an effective treatment as the first line of therapy for reno-ureteral lithiasis with a low percentage of complications.