Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison of ultrasound-assisted and pure fluoroscopy-guided extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for renal stones.
Chang, Tsung-Hsin; Lin, Wun-Rong; Tsai, Wei-Kung; Chiang, Pai-Kai; Chen, Marcelo; Tseng, Jen-Shu; Chiu, Allen W.
Afiliación
  • Chang TH; Department of Urology, MacKay Memorial Hospital, No. 92, Sec. 2, Zhongshan N. Rd., Taipei City, 10449, Taiwan. KeithChang0910@gmail.com.
  • Lin WR; Department of Urology, MacKay Memorial Hospital, No. 92, Sec. 2, Zhongshan N. Rd., Taipei City, 10449, Taiwan.
  • Tsai WK; Mackay Medical College, No.46, Sec. 3, Zhongzheng Rd., Sanzhi Dist., New Taipei City, 252, Taiwan.
  • Chiang PK; Department of Urology, MacKay Memorial Hospital, No. 92, Sec. 2, Zhongshan N. Rd., Taipei City, 10449, Taiwan.
  • Chen M; Mackay Medical College, No.46, Sec. 3, Zhongzheng Rd., Sanzhi Dist., New Taipei City, 252, Taiwan.
  • Tseng JS; Department of Urology, MacKay Memorial Hospital, No. 92, Sec. 2, Zhongshan N. Rd., Taipei City, 10449, Taiwan.
  • Chiu AW; Mackay Medical College, No.46, Sec. 3, Zhongzheng Rd., Sanzhi Dist., New Taipei City, 252, Taiwan.
BMC Urol ; 20(1): 183, 2020 Nov 10.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33172476
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

In this study, we aimed to compare the efficacy and clinical outcomes of shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) for patients with renal stones using pure fluoroscopy (FS) or ultrasound-assisted (USa) localization with two lithotripters.

METHODS:

We retrospectively identified 425 patients with renal calculi who underwent SWL with either a LiteMed LM-9200 ELMA lithotripter (209 cases), which combined ultrasound and fluoroscopic stone targeting or a Medispec EM-1000 lithotripter machine (216 cases), which used fluoroscopy for stone localization and tracking. The patient demographic data, stone-free rates, stone disintegration rates, retreatment rates and complication rates were analyzed.

RESULTS:

The USa group had a significantly higher overall stone-free rate (43.6 vs. 28.2%, p < 0.001) and stone disintegration rate (85.6 vs. 64.3%, p < 0.001), as well as a significantly lower retreatment rate (14.8 vs. 35.6%, p < 0.001) and complication rate (1.9 vs. 5.5%, p = 0.031) compared with the FS group. This superiority remained significant in the stone size < 1 cm stratified group. In the stone size > 1 cm group, the stone-free rate (32.4 vs. 17.8%, p = 0.028), disintegration rate (89.2 vs. 54.8%, p = 0.031) and retreatment rate (21.6 vs. 53.4%, p < 0.001) were still significantly better in the USa group, however there was no significant difference in the complication rate. The most common complication was post-SWL-related flank pain.

CONCLUSION:

SWL is a safe and non-invasive way of treating renal stones. This study compared two electromagnetic shock wave machines with different stone tracking systems. LiteMed LM-9200 ELMA lithotripter, which combined ultrasound and fluoroscopic stone targeting outperformed Medispec EM-1000 lithotripter, which used fluoroscopy for stone localization and tracking, with better stone-free rates and disintegration rates, as well as lower retreatment rates and complications with possible reduced radiation exposure.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Litotricia / Cálculos Renales Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies Idioma: En Revista: BMC Urol Asunto de la revista: UROLOGIA Año: 2020 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Litotricia / Cálculos Renales Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies Idioma: En Revista: BMC Urol Asunto de la revista: UROLOGIA Año: 2020 Tipo del documento: Article