Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Value of early second session shock wave lithotripsy in treatment of upper ureteric stones compared to laser ureteroscopy

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

Abstract

Purpose

The safety and efficacy of early second session shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) compared with laser ureteroscopy (URS) for the treatment of upper ureteric stones were evaluated.

Methods

From January to October 2019, 108 patients with upper ureteric stones (< 1.5 cm and ≤ 1000 Hounsfield unit (HU)) were randomized into SWL and laser URS groups. The second SWL session was performed within 48–72 h of the first session. Using plain abdominal X-ray and ultrasonography, patients were evaluated 48–72 h after the first SWL session and one week after the second and third SWL sessions or one week after URS. The procedure was considered a success when no additional procedures were needed to clear the stone. To determine the stone-free rate (SFR), noncontrast computed tomography of the urinary tract was performed three months postoperatively.

Results

In the SWL group, the success rates were 92.6% and 94.4% after the second and third sessions. The SFR was 96.2% in the laser URS group. The success rates were not significantly different between the second and third SWL sessions versus the laser URS (p = 0.418 and 0.660, respectively). Operative and fluoroscopy times were significantly longer in the SWL group (p = 0.001), and JJ stent insertions were needed after laser URS.

Conclusion

Ultraslow full-power SWL treatment of patients with upper ureteric stones (< 1.5 cm and ≤ 1000 HU) with an early second session is safe and effective compared to laser URS. Patients who do not respond to early second SWL session should be shifted to another treatment modality.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

BMI:

Body mass index

HAV:

High attenuation value

HU:

Hounsfield unit

KUB:

Kidney–ureter–bladder

NCCT:

Noncontrast computed tomography

PNL:

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy

SAV:

Stone attenuation value

SFR:

Stone-free rate

SSD:

Skin-to-stone distance

SWL:

Shock wave lithotripsy

URS:

Ureteroscopy

US:

Ultrasonography

M ± SD:

Mean ± standard deviation

References

  1. De S, Autorino R, Kim F et al (2014) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 67:125–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. De S, Autorino R, Kim FJ et al (2016) Corrigendum re: percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis [Eur. Urol. 2015; 67:125–37]. Eur Urol 69:85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Rassweiler JJ, Müller M, Fangerau M et al (2012) iPad-assisted percutaneous access to the kidney using marker-based navigation: initial clinical experience. Eur Urol 61:628–631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Al-Dessoukey AA, Abdallah M, Moussa AS et al (2020) Ultraslow full-power shock wave lithotripsy versus slow power-ramping shock wave lithotripsy in stones with high attenuation value: a randomized comparative study. Int J Urol 27:165–170. https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.14158

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Turan T, Efioglu O, Danacioglu YO et al (2018) Can intervals in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy sessions affect success in the treatment of upper ureteral stones? WideochirInne Tech Maloinwazyjne 13:507–511. https://doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2018.75873

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Türk (Chair) AP, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, et al. Guidelines Associates: S. Dabestani TD, Grivas N, Ruhayel Y. Eau Guidelines On Urolithiasis (Limited text update March 2017). 2017 [cited 2.2020]; Available from: https://uroweb.org/guideline/urolithiasis/? type=pocket-guidelines

  7. Wiesenthal JD, Ghiculete D, Ray AA, Honey RJ, Pace KT (2011) A clinical nomogram to predict the successful shock wave lithotripsy of renal and ureteral calculi. J Urol 186:556–562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Patel T, Kozakowski K, Hruby G, Gupta M (2009) Skin to stone distance is anindependent predictor of stone-free status following shockwave lithotripsy. J Endourol 23:1383–1385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Abdelhamid M, Mosharafa AA, Ibrahim H et al (2016) A prospective evaluation of high-resolution CT parameters in predicting extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy success for upper urinary tract calculi. J Endourol 30:1227–1232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lam JS, Greene TD, Gupta M (2002) Treatment of proximal ureteral calculi: holmium: YAG laser ureterolithotripsy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 167:1972–1976

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kijvikai K, Haleblian GE, Preminger GM, de la Rosette J (2007) Shock wave lithotripsy or ureteroscopy for the management of proximal ureteral calculi: an old discussion revisited. J Urol 178(4 Pt 1):1157–1163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.05.132

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lee YH, Tsai JY, Jiaan BP, Wu T, Yu CC (2006) Prospective randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopic lithotripsy for management of large upper third ureteral stones. Urology 67:480–484 (Discussion 4)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Aboutaleb H, Omar M, Salem S, Elshazly M (2016) Management of upperureteral stones exceeding 15 mm in diameter: shock wave lithotripsyversus semirigidureteroscopy with holmium: yttrium-aluminum-garnetlaser lithotripsy. SAGE Open Med 4:2050312116685180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Paterson RF, Lifshitz DA, Lingeman JE et al (2002) Stone fragmentation duringshock wave lithotripsy is improved by slowing the shock wave rate: studies with a new animal model. J Urol 168:2211–2215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Evan AP, Mc Ateer JA, Connors BA, Blomgren PM, Lingeman JE (2007) Renal injury during shock wave lithotripsy is significantly reduced by slowing the rate of shockwave delivery. BJU Int 100:624–627

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Joseph P, Mandal AK, Singh SK et al (2002) Computerized tomography attenuation value of renal calculus: can it predict successful fragmentation of the calculus by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy? A preliminary study. J Urol 167:1968–1971

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Dr. Dina Raafat for her corrections and advice on English writing.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Beni-Suef University, Beni-seuf, 62511, Egypt

    Ahmed M. Abdelbary, Ahmad A. Al-Dessoukey, Ayman S. Moussa, Akram A. Elmarakbi, Ahmed M. Ragheb, Osama Sayed, Ahmed M. Elbatanouny, Ahmed Abd El Latif, Amr M. Lofty, Ahmed G. Mohamed & Rabie M. Ibrahim

  2. Department of Urology, Beni-Suef Insurance Hospital, Beni-seuf, Egypt

    Shehab Salah

Authors
  1. Ahmed M. Abdelbary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ahmad A. Al-Dessoukey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ayman S. Moussa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Akram A. Elmarakbi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ahmed M. Ragheb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Osama Sayed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ahmed M. Elbatanouny
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Ahmed Abd El Latif
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Amr M. Lofty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Ahmed G. Mohamed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Shehab Salah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Rabie M. Ibrahim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AMA contributed to manuscript editing, protocol development; AAA-D contributed to protocol development; ASM contributed to protocol development; AAE contributed to data analysis; AMR contributed to data analysis; AME contributed to data management; AAEL contributed to data analysis; AML contributed to data management; AGM contributed to data management, manuscript writing; SS contributed to data collection; RMI contributed to manuscript writing, protocol development, data analysis.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rabie M. Ibrahim.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

There are no conflicts of interest. The authors have no relevant financial or nonfinancial interest to disclose.

Research involving human participant

Approval was obtained from the ethics committee of Beni-suef University. Informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Abdelbary, A.M., Al-Dessoukey, A.A., Moussa, A.S. et al. Value of early second session shock wave lithotripsy in treatment of upper ureteric stones compared to laser ureteroscopy. World J Urol 39, 3089–3093 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03560-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03560-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation