Skip to main content
Log in

Retrograde transureteral approach: a safe and efficient treatment for recurrent cystine renal stones

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Urological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Most patients presenting cystinuria require multiple urological procedures during their lifetime. In this kind of patients the availability of minimally invasive procedure represents an advantage of minimizing the cumulative morbidity of several repeated treatments. Herein we report our experience using ureterorenoscopy (URS) for the treatment of recurrent renal cystine stones. From 2003 to 2007, 10 patients (4 males and 6 females) with one or multiple recurrent renal cystine stones underwent URS. Overall, 21 procedures have been performed. Mean maximum diameter of stones was 11.2 mm (range 5–30 mm). Either 8–9.5 F semirigid or 7.9 F flexible ureteroscopes were used. In 6 cases, stones were removed using a basket; in 9 procedures laser lithotripsy with flexible scope was performed; in 6 cases renal calculi were pulled down in the ureter using flexible instrument and then shattered with laser introduced by semirigid instrument. Stone-free status was defined as the absence of any residual fragment. A complete stone clearance was obtained in 15 out of 21 procedures (71%). In 5 cases (24%) significant residual fragments occurred; in the remaining case (5%) URS was ineffective. In 5 out of these unsuccessful procedures, stone clearance was obtained with auxiliary treatments. The last patient has not been treated yet. No major complications occurred as a result of the procedures. URS offers excellent advantages in case of recurrent hard calculi such as cystine stones. Minimally invasive procedures allow satisfactory outcomes, improving patients’ quality of life.

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.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Tiselius HG (2005) Removal of ureteral stones with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopic procedures. What can we learn from the literature in terms of results and treatment efforts? Urol Res 33:185–190

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tiselius HG, Ackermann D, Alken P, Buck C, Conort P, Gallucci M (2001) Guidelines on urolithiasis. Eur Urol 40:362–371

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Paik ML, Wainstein MA, Spirnak JP, Hampel N, Resnick MI (1998) Current indications for open stone surgery in the treatment of renal and ureteral calculi. J Urol 159:374–379

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Lingeman JE (1996) Lithotripsy and surgery. Semin Nephrol 16:487–498

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Lingeman JE, Coury TA, Newman DM, Kahnoski RJ, Mertz JH, Mosbaugh PG, Steele RE, Woods JR (1987) Comparison of results and morbidity of percutaneous nephrostolithotomy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 138:485–490

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Havel D, Saussine C, Fath C, Lang H, Faure F, Jacqmin D (1998) Single stones of the lower pole of the kidney. Comparative results of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrostolithotomy. Eur Urol 33:396–400

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. May DJ, Chandhoke PS (1998) Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for solitary lower pole renal calculi. J Urol 159:24–27

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Graff J, Diederichs W, Schulze H (1988) Long-term follow-up in 1003 extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy patients. J Urol 140:479–483

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Schmeller NT, Kersting H, Schuller J, Chaussy C, Schmiedt E (1984) Combination of chemolysis and shock wave lithotripsy in the treatment of cystine renal calculi. J Urol 131:434–438

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Wang LP, Wong HY, Griffith DP (1997) Treatment options in struvite stones. Urol Clin North Am 24:149–162

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Politis G, Griffith DP (1987) ESWL: stone-free efficacy based upon stone size and location. World J Urol 5:255–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Netto NR Jr, Claro JFA, Lemos GC, Cortado PL (1991) Renal calculi in lower pole calices: what is the best method of treatment? J Urol 146:721–723

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Locke DR, Newman RC, Steinbock GS, Finlayson B (1990) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in horseshoe kidneys. Urology 35:407–411

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Sampaio FJB, Aragao AHM (1994) Limitations of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for lower caliceal stones: anatomic insight. J Endourol 8:241–247

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Elbahnasy AM, Clayman RV, Shalhav AL, Hoenig DM, Chandhoke P, Lingeman JE, Denstedt JD, Kahn R, Assimos DG, Nakada SY (1998) Lower-pole caliceal stone clearance after shockwave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrostolithotomy, and flexible ureteroscopy: impact of radiographic spatial anatomy. J Endourol 12:113–119

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Elbahnasy AM, Shalhav AL, Hoenig DM, Elashry OM, Smith DS, Mcdougall EM, Clayman RV (1998) Lower caliceal stone clearance after shock wave lithotripsy or ureteroscopy: the impact of lower pole radiographic anatomy. J Urol 159:676–682

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Knoll T, Zöllner A, Wendt-Nordahl G, Michel MS, Alken P (2005) Cystinuria in childhood and adolescence: recommendations for diagnosis, treatment, and follow up. Pediatr Nephrol 20:19–24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Yiu MK, Liu PL, Yiu TF, Chan AYT (1996) Clinical experience with holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy of ureteral calculi. Lasers Surg Med 19:103–106

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Coe FL, Evan A, Worcester E (2005) Kidney stone disease. J Clin Invest 115:2598–2608

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Straub M, Strohmaier WL, Berg W, Beck B, Hoppe B, Laube N, Lahme S, Schmidt M, Hesse A, Koehrmann KU (2005) Diagnosis and metaphylaxis of stone disease Consensus concept of the National Working Committee on Stone Disease for the Upcoming German Urolithiasis Guideline. World J Urol 23:309–323

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Katz G, Lencovsky Z, Pode D, Shapiro A, Caine M (1990) Place of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in the management of cystine calculi. Urology 36:124–128

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Schuster TG, Russell KY, Bloom DA, Koo HP, Faerber GJ (2002) Ureteroscopy for the treatment of urolithiasis in children. J Urol 167:1813

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Streem SB, Yost A, Mascha E (1996) Clinical implications of clinically insignificant stone fragments after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 155:1186–1190

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lorenzo Ruggera.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ruggera, L., Zanin, M., Beltrami, P. et al. Retrograde transureteral approach: a safe and efficient treatment for recurrent cystine renal stones. Urol Res 39, 411–415 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-010-0358-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-010-0358-2

Keywords

Navigation