Skip to main content
Log in

ESWL in situ or ureteroscopy for ureteric stones?

  • Published:
World Journal of Urology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

As documented by follow-up data on ureteric stones in 1259 ureteric units treated, ESWL in situ on advanced lithotriptors with stone location by ultrasonography and fluoroscopy was successful without any retrograde ureteric manipulation in 98% of stones in the upper, 71% in the iliac, and 84% in the distal ureter; 85% of the units were stone-free within 3 months: ancillary measures were needed in 11% and the stone-free state was reached after a median of 39 days. The results obtained with treatment after manipulation of the stone from the upper and mid-ureter by retrograde instrumentation were similar, but ancillary measures were needed in 20% of cases. Endoscopic management with rod-lens ureteroscopes was highly efficient in the distal and midureter, but involved a complication rate of about 11% and required general anaesthesia. In the upper ureter it was abandoned in favour of the two former methods. Endoscopic stone removal has been greatly facilitated by the development of ultrathin, semirigid ureteroscopes 6.2–9 F in diameter, as well as by laser and pneumatic lithotriptors that operate through their minute working ports. Of the stones impacted in 127 ureteric units, 97% were successfully managed at the first attempt, involving an overall complication rate of 6%. Although ESWL in situ without any instrumentation remains the primary treatment of choice for stones in the upper and distal ureter, primary ureteroscopy is again being employed more frequently for stones in the iliac ureter, which are more difficult to focus, and small stones in the distal ureter, as well as in patients unwilling to accept the prolonged time until the urinary tract becomes stone-free after ESWL. This resulted in an increase in the frequency of ureteroscopy as the primary treatment for ureteric stones from 9% in 1990 to 32% in 1991.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Albrecht W, Türk C, Marberger M (1990) ESWL and endourology on the same table: a feasible concept? Lithotripsy Stone Disease 2:309–319

    Google Scholar 

  2. Blute ML, Segura JW, Patterson DE (1988) Ureteroscopy. J Urol 139:510–512

    Google Scholar 

  3. Dretler SP (1988) Techniques of laser lithotripsy. J Endourol 2:123–129

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dretler SP, Cho G (1989) Semirigid ureteroscopy: a new genre. J Urol 141:1314–1317

    Google Scholar 

  5. El-Faquif SR, Husain I, Ekman PE, Sharma ND, Chakrabarty A, Talic R (1988) Primary choice of intervention for distal ureteric stone, ureteroscopy or ESWL? Br J Urol 62:13–18

    Google Scholar 

  6. Graft J, Pastor J, Funke PJ, Mach P, Senge T (1988) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral stones: a retrospective analysis of 417 cases. J Urol 139:513–516

    Google Scholar 

  7. Holden D, Rao PN (1989) Ureteral stones: the results of primary in situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 142:37–39

    Google Scholar 

  8. Jenkins AD, Gillenwater JY (1988) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the prone position: treatment of stones in the distal ureter or anomalous kidney. J Urol 139:911–915

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Languetin JM, Jichlinski P, Favre R, Niederhäusern W von (1990) The Swiss lithoclast. J Urol 143:179A

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lingeman JE, Shirrell WL, Newman DM, Mosbaugh PG, Steele RE, Woods JR (1987) Management of upper ureteral calculi with extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy. J Urol 138:720–723

    Google Scholar 

  11. Liong ML, Clayman RV, Gittes RF, Lingeman JE, Huffman JL, Lyon ES (1988) Treatment options for proximal ureteral urolithiasis: review and recommendations. J Urol 141:504–509

    Google Scholar 

  12. Marberger M (1991) Transurethral and transureteral stone manipulation. In: Marberger M, Fitzpatrick JM, Jenkins AD, Pak Ch YC (eds) Stone surgery. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh London Melbourne, pp 115–165

    Google Scholar 

  13. Miller K, Bubeck J, Hautmann R (1986) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of distal ureteral calculi. Eur Urol 12:305–307

    Google Scholar 

  14. Mueller SC, Wilbert D, Thüroff JW, Alicen P (1986) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of ureteral stones: clinical experience and experimental findings. J Urol 135:831–834

    Google Scholar 

  15. Netto NR, Lemos GC, Claro JFA (1990) In situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral calculi. J Urol 144:253–254

    Google Scholar 

  16. Rassweiler J, Hath U, Lutz K, Eisenberger F (1986) In situ ESWL beim prävesikalen Harnleiterstein. Akt Urol 17:328–331

    Google Scholar 

  17. Simon J, Corbusier A, Mendes Leal A, Bossche M van den, Wespes E, Regemorter G van, Schulman CC (1989) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for urinary stone disease: clinical experience with the electromagnetic lithotriptor “Litho-tar”. Eur Urol 16:7–11

    Google Scholar 

  18. Stackl W, Marberger M (1986) Late complications of the management of ureteral calculi with the ureteroscope. J Urol 136:386–389

    Google Scholar 

  19. Watson G, Murray S, Dretler S, Parrish J (1988) The pulsed dye laser for fragmenting urinary calculi. J Urol 138:195–198

    Google Scholar 

  20. Zehntner C, Casanova GA, Marth D, Zingg EJ (1989) Treatment of distal ureteral calculi with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Eur Urol 16:250–252

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hofbauer, J., Tuerk, C., Höbarth, K. et al. ESWL in situ or ureteroscopy for ureteric stones?. World J Urol 11, 54–58 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00182172

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00182172

Keywords

Navigation