Similar content being viewed by others
References
Parker BD et al. (2004) Efficiency and cost of treating proximal ureteral stones: shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy plus holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser. Urology 64: 1102–1106
Chow GK et al. (2003) Ureteroscopy: effect of technology and technique on clinical practice. J Urol 170: 99–102
Knispel HH et al. (1998) Pneumatic lithotripsy applied through deflected working channel of miniureteroscope: results in 143 patients. J Endourol 12: 513–515
Dretler SP (2000) Ureteroscopy for proximal ureteral calculi: prevention of stone migration. J Endourol 14: 565–567
Holley PG et al. (2005) Assessment of novel ureteral occlusion device and comparison with Stone Cone in prevention of stone fragment migration during lithotripsy. J Endourol 19: 200–203
Dretler SP (2001) The Stone Cone: a new generation of basketry. J Urol 165: 1593–1596
Marguet CG et al. (2005) In vitro comparison of stone retropulsion and fragmentation of the frequency doubled, double pulse nd:yag laser and the holmium:yag laser. J Urol 173: 1797–1800
Desai MR et al. (2002) The Dretler Stone Cone: a device to prevent ureteral stone migration–the initial clinical experience. J Urol 167: 1985–1988
Maislos SD et al. (2004) Efficacy of the Stone Cone for treatment of proximal ureteral stones. J Endourol 18: 862–864
Pardalidis NP et al. (2005) Prevention of retrograde calculus migration with the Stone Cone. Urol Res 33: 61–64
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
Dr Dretler is a consultant to Cook, ACMI, Boston Scientific, and to MedSource/Accellent, the manufacturer of the Stone Cone.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dretler, S. Prevention of retrograde stone migration during ureteroscopy. Nat Rev Urol 3, 60–61 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpuro0376
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpuro0376
- Springer Nature Limited