Advertisement

Current perspectives on urolithiasis management in China

  • Si-xing YangEmail author
  • Chao Song
  • Yun-he Xiong
Letter to the Editor
  • 10 Downloads

Dear Editor

Great success has been achieved in the management of urolithiasis in China over the decades [1]. However, whether and how Chinese urologists follow the accepted guidelines [2, 3, 4, 5] is unknown. To answer the question, we performed a nationwide survey in China. Here we briefly report the results, point out current issues, and propose recommendations on urolithiasis management in China.

Between April and June 2019, a 38-item questionnaire was sent to 690 urologists at tertiary/teaching, provincial/municipal, and county hospitals in China, of whom 683 (98.9%) responded, and 681 (68.7%) returned valid responses. As shown in Table 1, for the first-time uncomplicated upper urinary tract stones between 0.6 and 1.0 cm, 397 (58.4%) urologists recommended extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL), whereas 279 (41.0%) recommended lifestyle adjustment ( n = 64, 9.4%) or medical expulsive therapy ( n = 215, 31.6%). For the stones between 1.0 and 2.0 cm, 287 (42.2%) urologists...

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Dr. Zhangqun Ye and Dr. Yaoliang Deng for their kind support to this project. This study was supported by Hubei Health Committee Science Foundation General Program (Grant no. WJ2017M024), Applied Basic Research Programs of Wuhan Science and Technology Bureau (Grant no. 2017060201010203) and National Natural Science Funds of China (Grant no. 31600785).

Author contributions

SY and YX designed/performed most of the investigation, data analysis and wrote the manuscript; CS provided literature search, date collection and statistical assistance; WL and BL contributed to interpretation of the data and analyses. All of the authors have read and approved the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Yang SX, Ye ZQ (2018) Reconsiderations of several key issues in the treatment of urolithiasis. Chin J Urol 39:644–646Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pearle MS, Goldfarb DS, Assimos DG, Curhan G, Denu-Ciocca CJ, Matlaga BR, Monga M, Penniston KL, Preminger GM, Turk TM, White JR, American Urological A (2014) Medical management of kidney stones: AUA guideline. J Urol 192:316–324.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.05.006 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Taguchi K, Cho SY, Ng AC, Usawachintachit M, Tan YK, Deng YL, Shen CH, Gyawali P, Alenezi H, Basiri A, Bou S, Djojodemedjo T, Sarica K, Shi L, Singam P, Singh SK, Yasui T (2019) The Urological Association of Asia clinical guideline for urinary stone disease. Int J Urol 26:688–709.  https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.13957 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Türk C, Petřík A, Sarica K, Seitz C, Knoll TJEU (2016) EAU guidelines on diagnosis and conservative management of urolithiasis. Eur Urol 69:468–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Duan ZQ, Zhu XY, Zhang Y, Wang YH, Liu YY, Guo HL, Xiao J, Wang ZR (2008) Effects of circadian gene mPer1 on therapeutic sensitivity of adriamycin. Sichuan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban 39:925–928PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of UrologyRenmin Hospital of Wuhan UniversityWuhanPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations