Advertisement

In Situ Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy v Ureteroscopy The Case for Ureteroscopy

  • Stephen P. Dretler

Abstract

The issue at hand is the appropriate use of ureteroscopy for the treatment of ureteral calculi and the advantages to the patient of this modality, when compared to in situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) The discussion will be divided into two segments: upper ureteral calculi (defined as those above the level of the pelvic bones and below the level of the ureteropelvic junction); and lower ureteral calculi (which include calculi from the iliac crest to the ureterovesical junction). The primary considerations in the management of the patient with a ureteral calculus are: the successful removal of the calculus, the number of procedures required to accomplish removal, the efficiency of removal or the time required to achieve a stone-free state, the availability of the treatment, and (of increasing importance) the cost of treatment.

Keywords

Shock Wave Lithotripsy Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy Ureteral Stone Ureteral Calculus Laser Lithotripsy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Eisenberger F, Schmidt A, Rassweiler J: Ureteral stones: how to manage them. In Guiliani L and Puppo P (eds): Controversies on the Management of Ureteral Stones. Basel: Karger, 1988.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dretler SP, Riley J, Keating MA: An algorithm for the management of ureteral calculi. J Urol 136: 1190, 1986.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lupu AN, Fuchs GJ, Chaussy CG: Treatment of ureteral calculi by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: UCLA experience. Urology 32: 217, 1988.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mueller SC, Wilbert D, Thuroff JW, et al: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of ureteral stones: clinical experience and experimental findings. J Urol 135: 831, 1986.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Riehle RA, and Naslund EB: Treatment of calculi in the upper ureter with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Surg Gynecol Obstet 164: 1, 1987.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Weinberg JJ, Snyder JA, Smith AD: Mechanical extraction of stones with rigid ureteroscopes. Endourology Update. Urol Clin N Am 15: 339, 1988.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Politis GM and Griffith DP: Outpatient management of upper tract urinary problems. J Endourol 1: 99, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lingeman JE, Sonda LP, Kahnoski RJ, et al: Ureteral stone management: emerging concepts. J Urol 135: 1172, 1986.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Arnold J and Lyon E: Ureteroscopic stone extraction: the University of Chicago experience and methods used to overcome pitfalls. J Urol 135: 257A (abs), 1986.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Marberger M: personal communication, February 1989.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Graff J, Pastor J, Funke PJ, et al: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral stones: a retrospective analysis of 417 cases. J Urol 139: 513, 1988.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dretler SP: An evaluation of ureteral laser lithotripsy: 225 consecutive cases. J Urol,in press.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Miller K, Bubeck JR, Hautmann R: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of distal ureteral calculi. Eur Urol 12: 305, 1986.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jenkins AD and Gillenwater JY: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the prone position: treatment of stones in the distal ureter or anomalous kidney. J Urol 139: 911, 1988.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chaussy CG and Fuchs GJ: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of distal ureteral calculi: is it worthwhile? J Endourol 1:1, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Becht E, Moll V, Neisius D, et al: Treatment of prevesical calculi by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 139: 916, 1988.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Manzone DJ and Chiang B: In situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy treatment of lower ureteral stones aided by low-flow saline irrigation. In Guiliani L and Puppo P (eds): Controversies on the Management of Ureteral Stones. Basel: Karger, 1988.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jenkins AD: Dornier extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral stones. Endourology update. Urol Clin N Am 15: 377, 1988.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Green DF and Lytton B: Early experience with direct vision electrohydraulic lithotripsy of ureteral calculi. J Urol 133: 767, 1985.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Perez-Castro EE: Ureteral stones: how to manage them. In Guiliani L and Puppo P (eds): Controversies on the Management of Ureteral Stones. Basel: Karger, 1988.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Coptcoat MJ, Miller R, Wickham JEA: Can lasertripsy replace ESWL for ureteral stones? In Guiliani L and Puppo P (eds): Controversies on the Management of Ureteral Stones. Basel: Karger, 1988.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nesbitt JA and Drago JR: Cost comparison of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy v ureteroscopic laser destruction of distal ureteral stones. J Urol 139: 292A (abs), 1988.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lyon ES: Ureteral calculi: treatment in transition. Editorial. J Urol 139: 1286, 1988.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephen P. Dretler
    • 1
  1. 1.Massachusetts General Hospital Harvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations