Shockwave Lithotripsy Is an Efficacious Treatment Modality for Obese Patients with Upper Ureteral Calculi: Logistic Regression and Matched-Pair Analyses from a Dedicated Center Comparing Treatment Outcomes by Skin-to-Stone Distance.

Objectives: To assess the association of skin-to-stone distance (SSD) and stone-free rates following extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) using two statistical methods: logistic regression and a matched-pair analysis approach. Patients and Methods: Patients with a solitary radio-opaque upper ureteral calculus diagnosed on noncontrast computed tomography were included. Patients were treated with a Sonolith I-Sys Lithotripter (focal depth 17 cm). Stone treatment success was defined as stone free (fragments ≤3 mm) at 3 months. Failure was defined as persistent fragments beyond 3 months or requirement for intervention with ureteroscopy. The outcome was assessed by a plain kidney, ureter, and bladder radiograph (KUB) at 2 weeks. Logistic regression was used to determine association of patient and stone factors with treatment failure. The patient cohort was divided into tertiles by SSD, and matched-pair analysis was undertaken between individuals from the top and bottom tertiles (SSD ≤12 cm and SSD ≥14 cm). Matching criteria consisted of age, sex, maximum stone diameter (±2 mm), and stone density (±250 HU). Results: From a database of 2849 patients who underwent SWL, 397 patients were identified who had treatment of a single upper ureteral stone. Age (odds ratio [OR]: 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.04, p = 0.007), SSD (OR: 1.16, 95% CI: 1.03-1.32, p = 0.02), stone side (OR: 1.65, 95% CI 1.01-2.73, p = 0.05), stone diameter (OR: 1.09, 95% CI: 1.00-1.19, p = 0.05), and multiple sessions (OR: 4.65, 95% CI: 2.61-8.29, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with treatment failure by logistic regression univariable analysis. Multiple sessions was the only factor significantly associated with treatment failure on multivariable analysis (OR: 4.03, 95% CI: 2.18-7.42, p < 0.001). From a cohort of 141 patients with SSD ≥14 cm and 174 patients with a SSD ≤12 cm, 66 matches were identified (132 patients). Forty-nine patients (74.2%) with SSD ≥14 cm were deemed stone free at follow-up vs 51 patients (77.3%) with SSD ≤12 cm (p = 0.85). Conclusion: This study demonstrates by two statistical methods that SWL can provide efficacious treatment of upper ureteral stones in obese patients and that the upper threshold of SSD for SWL with Sonolith I-SYS could be revised to allow these patients the benefits of SWL.

Primary SWL Is an Efficient and Cost-Effective Treatment for Lower Pole Renal Stones Between 10 and 20 mm in Size: A Large Single Center Study.

INTRODUCTION: To assess the clinical features, outcomes, complications, and cost-effectiveness of shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), flexible ureterorenoscopy (FURS), and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in the treatment of lower pole (LP) stones (10-20 mm) in a large tertiary referral center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients treated for solitary LP stones (10-20 mm) between 2008 and 2013 were identified from a prospective database. SWL was used as primary treatment in all cases (following a stone multidisciplinary team assessment), with FURS and PCNL reserved for SWL contraindications, failure, or patient choice. "Success" was defined as stone free and/or clinically insignificant stone fragments (≤3 mm) at 1 and 3 months follow-up. Effect of anatomy on SWL success was determined from using CT images and regression analysis. Average cost per treatment modality (including additional second-line treatments) was calculated for each group using the National Health Service England 2014/15 National Tariff Healthcare Resource Group codes. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-five patients were included (mean age 54.9; median stone size 12 mm). One hundred ninety-eight (88%), 21 (9.3%), and 6 (2.7%) patients underwent SWL, FURS, and PCNL as primary treatments, respectively, for median stone sizes of 12, 12, and 20 mm. Overall success rates were 82.8%, 76.1%, and 66.7%, respectively (p < 0.05). Sixty-three percent of patients undergoing primary SWL were effectively treated after one session. Anatomical analysis determined infundibulopelvic angle and infundibular length to be significantly different in patients effectively treated with SWL (p = 0.04). The average cost per treatment modality was also significantly lower for SWL (£750) than for FURS (£1261) or PCNL (£2658) (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: SWL is both an efficacious and cost-effective primary treatment for patients with solitary LP stones (10-20 mm). The majority of patients can be effectively treated with primary SWL in a dedicated stone center, with the benefits of a short length of stay, low complication, and auxiliary treatment rates. The referral of such patients to high-volume lithotripsy centers with demonstrable outcomes should be given due consideration.

Endoscopic versus laparoscopic management of noninvasive upper tract urothelial carcinoma: 20-year single center experience.

PURPOSE: We compare the outcomes of endoscopic surgery to laparoscopic nephroureterectomy for the management of specifically noninvasive upper tract urothelial carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective database review identified consecutive patients with clinically noninvasive upper tract urothelial carcinoma who underwent endoscopic surgery (59, via ureteroscopic ablation or percutaneous resection) or laparoscopic nephroureterectomy (70) at a single center during 20 years (1991 to 2011). Overall survival, upper tract urothelial carcinoma specific survival, upper tract recurrence-free survival, intravesical recurrence-free survival, progression-free survival and renal unit survival were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods, with differences assessed using the log rank test. RESULTS: Median age and followup were 74.8 years and 50 months, respectively. Overall renal preservation in the endoscopic group was high (5-year renal unit survival 82.5%), although this came at a cost of high local recurrence (endoscopic surgery 5-year recurrence-free survival 49.3%, laparoscopic nephroureterectomy 100%, p <0.0001). For G1 upper tract urothelial carcinoma, endoscopic surgery 5-year disease specific survival (100%) was equivalent to that of laparoscopic nephroureterectomy (100%). However, laparoscopic nephroureterectomy demonstrated superior disease specific survival to endoscopic surgery for G2 disease (91.7% vs 62.5%, p = 0.037) and superior progression-free survival for G3 disease (88.9% vs 55.6%, p = 0.033). CONCLUSIONS: For G1 upper tract urothelial carcinoma, endoscopic management can provide effective oncologic control and renal preservation. However, endoscopic management should not be considered for higher grade disease except in compelling imperative cases or in patients with poor life expectancy as oncologic outcomes are inferior to those of laparoscopic nephroureterectomy.

Long-term endoscopic management of upper tract urothelial carcinoma: 20-year single-centre experience.

UNLABELLED: Study Type--Therapy (case series) Level of Evidence 4. What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Endoscopic management of small, low-grade, non-invasive upper tract urothelial cell carcinoma (UTUC) is a management option for selected groups of patients. However, the long-term survival outcomes of endoscopically-managed UTUC are uncertain because only four institutions have reported outcomes of more than 40 patients beyond 50 months of follow-up. Moreover, there is significant variance in the degree of underlying UTUC pathology verification in some of these reports, which precludes an analysis of disease-specific survival outcomes. The present study represents one of the largest endoscopically managed series of patients with UTUC, with a long-term follow-up. The degree of verification of underlying UTUC pathology is one of the highest, which allows a grade-stratified analysis of different outcomes, including upper-tract recurrence-free survival, intravesical recurrence-free survival, renal unit survival and disease-specific survival. These outcomes provide further evidence suggesting that endoscopic management of highly selected, low-grade UTUC can provide effective oncological control, as well as renal preservation, in experienced centres. OBJECTIVE: • To report the long-term outcomes of patients with upper tract urothelial cell carcinoma (UTUC) who were treated endoscopically (either via ureteroscopic ablation or percutaneous resection) at a single institution over a 20-year period. PATIENTS AND METHODS: • Departmental operation records were reviewed to identify patients who underwent endoscopic management of UTUC as their primary treatment. • Outcomes were obtained via retrospective analysis of notes, electronic records and registry data. • Survival outcomes, including overall survival (OS), UTUC-specific survival (disease-specific survival; DSS), upper-tract recurrence-free survival, intravesical recurrence-free survival, renal unit survival and progression-free survival, were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods and grade-stratified differences were analyzed using the log-rank test. RESULTS: • Between January 1991 and April 2011, 73 patients underwent endoscopic management of UTUC with a median age at diagnosis of 67.7 years. • All patients underwent ureteroscopy and biopsy-confirmation of pathology was obtained in 81% (n = 59) of the patients. In total, 14% (n = 10) of the patients underwent percutaneous resection. • Median (range; mean) follow-up was 54 (1-223; 62.8) months. • Upper tract recurrence occurred in 68% (n = 50). Eventually, 19% (n = 14) of the patients proceeded to nephroureterectomy. • The estimated OS and DSS were 69.7% and 88.9%, respectively, at 5 years, and 40.3% and 77.4%, respectively, at 10 years. The estimated mean and median OS times were 119 months and 107 months, respectively. The estimated mean DSS time was 190 months. CONCLUSIONS: • The present study represents one of the largest reported series of endoscopically-managed UTUC, with high pathological verification and long-term follow-up. • Upper-tract recurrence is common, which mandates regular ureteroscopic surveillance. • However, in selected patients, this approach has a favourable DSS, with a relatively low nephroureterectomy rate, and therefore provides oncological control and renal preservation in patients more likely to die eventually from other causes.

Ureteroscopic and percutaneous management of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC): systematic review.

UNLABELLED: What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Endoscopic management of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) using either ureteroscopy and laser ablation, or percutaneous resection, is a management option for treating selected low-grade tumours with favourable characteristics. However, the evidence base for such practice is relatively weak, as the reported experience is mainly limited to small case series (level of evidence 4), or non-randomised comparative studies that are unmatched for tumour stage (level of evidence 3b), with variability of follow-up duration and reported outcome measures. The present systematic review comprehensively reviews the outcomes of all studies of endoscopic management of UTUC, including the role of topical adjuvant therapy. It establishes for the first time a structured reference for endoscopic management of UTUC, and is a foundation for further clinical studies. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the oncological outcomes of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) treated with ureteroscopic and percutaneous management. The standard treatment of UTUC is radical nephroureterectomy (RNU). However, over the last two decades several institutions have treated UTUC endoscopically, either via ureteroscopic ablation or percutaneous nephroscopic resection of tumour (PNRT), for both imperative and elective indications. METHODS: For evidence acquisition the Pubmed database was searched for English language publications in December 2011 using the following terms: upper tract (UT) transitional cell carcinoma (TCC), upper tract TCC, UTTCC, upper tract urothelial cell carcinoma, upper tract urothelial carcinoma, UTUC, endoscopic management, ureteroscopic management, laser ablation, percutaneous management, PNRT, conservative management, ureteroscopic biopsy, biopsy, BCG, mitomycin C, topical therapy. RESULTS: There are no randomised trials comparing endoscopic management with RNU. Most published studies were retrospective case series (and database reviews), or unmatched comparative studies. There was strong selection bias for favourable tumour characteristics in many endoscopically treated groups. There was variation in medical comorbidity and indication for treatment across different study groups. The biopsy verification of underlying UTUC pathology was inconsistent. The follow-up in most studies was limited, typically to a mean 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: There is a high rate of UT recurrence with endoscopically managed UTUC, and a grade-related risk of tumour progression and disease-specific mortality. Overall, renal preservation may be high with ≈20% of patients proceeding eventually to RNU. For highly selected Grade 1 (or low-grade) disease managed in experienced centres, 5-year disease-specific survival (DSS) may be equivalent to RNU, although the small study groups and short follow-ups preclude comments on less favourable Grade 1 (or low-grade) tumour characteristics, or DSS, in the longer-term. For Grade 3 (or high-grade) disease, DSS outcomes are poor and endoscopic management should only be considered for compelling imperative indications in the context of the patient's overall life expectancy and competing comorbidity.

Management of stones in childhood.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review was to report on the latest world literature relating to paediatric stone disease. Inevitably, because of the small numbers, the literature is limited and consists mainly of case series from individual centres. There is also a wide variation in criteria and techniques, making direct comparison limited. RECENT FINDINGS: Changes in the incidence of stone disease are becoming more apparent particularly in female patients. Metabolic abnormalities can be identified in the majority of children with stones, and even in the absence of obvious physical stone, if detected warrant further follow-up. Data supporting the safety and efficacy of treatments for stones in children is improving constantly, but choosing the best option may be difficult on current evidence. Better long-term follow-up is still needed regarding adverse effects of treatment. CONCLUSION: A high index of suspicion is required for the diagnosis of stone disease in children, especially in the very young. After exclusion of anatomical abnormalities, metabolic evaluation is important in management and prevention of recurrence. Modalities for treatment are expanding all the time, but due to overall small numbers, and variations in the availability of technology, consensus views about treatment are difficult to agree.