Skip to main content
Log in

Prognostic Factors of Success of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) in the Treatment of Renal Stones

  • Published:
International Urology and Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the factors that affect the success rate of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for treatment of renal stones. Patients and methods: Between January 2000 and December 2003, 427 patients with single or multiple renal stones (<30 mm, largest diameter) underwent ESWL monotherapy using Storz SL 20 lithotriptor. The results of treatment were evaluated after 3 months of follow-up. Treatment success was defined as complete clearance of the stones or presence of clinically insignificant residual fragments <4 mm. The success rate was correlated with the characteristics of the patients, conditions of the urinary tract and stone features. Results: At 3-month follow-up, the overall success rate was 333/427 (78%). Repeat treatment was needed in 226 patients (53.1%). Post-ESWL auxiliary procedures were required in 36 patients (8.4%). Post-ESWL complications were recorded in 16 patients (3.7%). Of the 10 prognostic factors studied, 5 had a significant impact on the success rate, namely: renal morphology, congenital anomalies, stone size, stone site and number of treated stones. Other factors including age, sex, nationality, stone nature (de novo or recurrent) and ureteric stenting had no significant impact on the success rate. Conclusions: The success rate of ESWL for the treatment of renal stones could be predicted by stone size, location and number, radiological renal features and congenital renal anomalies.

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. TD Cohen GH Preminger (1997) ArticleTitleManagement of calyceal calculi Urol Clin North Am 24 81–86 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0094-0143(05)70356-6 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByiB3c7gt1E%3D Occurrence Handle9048854

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. M Abdel-Khalek KZ Sheir AA Mokhtar et al. (2004) ArticleTitlePrediction of success rate after extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy of renal stones. A multivariate analysis model Scand J Urol Nephrol 38 161–167 Occurrence Handle15204407

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. NJ Lalak SA Moussa G Smith DA Tolley (2002) ArticleTitleThe Dornier compact Delta lithotriptor: the first 500 renal calculi J Endourol 16 3–7 Occurrence Handle11890447

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. CM Sorensen PS Chandhoke (2002) ArticleTitleIs lower pole calyceal anatomy predictive of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy success for primary lower pole kidney stones? J Urol 168 2377–2382 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64149-3 Occurrence Handle12441921

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. G Zanetti E Montanari A Mandressi et al. (1991) ArticleTitleLong-term results of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in renal stone treatment J Endourol 5 61–64

    Google Scholar 

  6. J Rassweiller KU Kohrmann P Alken (1992) ArticleTitleESWL, including imaging Curr Opin Urol 2 291–299

    Google Scholar 

  7. M Tolon C Miroglu H Erol et al. (1991) ArticleTitleA report on extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy results on 1569 units in an outpatient clinic J Urol 145 695–698 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By6C2s7js1Y%3D Occurrence Handle2005680

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. DK Ackermann R Fuhrimann D Pfluger et al. (1994) ArticleTitlePrognosis after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of radiopaque renal calculi: a multivariate analysis Eur Urol 25 105–109 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByuC1crmvVc%3D Occurrence Handle8137849

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. V Poulakis P Dahm U Witzsch et al. (2003) ArticleTitlePrediction of lower pole stone clearance after shock wave lithotripsy using an artificial renal network J Urol 169 1250–1256 Occurrence Handle10.1097/01.ju.0000055624.65386.b9 Occurrence Handle12629337

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. JE Lingeman YI Siegel B Steale et al. (1994) ArticleTitleManagement of lower pole nephrolithiasis: a critical analysis J Urol 151 663–667 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByuC2c3gt1Y%3D Occurrence Handle8308977

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. NF Logarakis MA Jewett J Luymes RJ Honey (2000) ArticleTitleVariation in clinical outcome following shock wave lithotripsy J Urol 163 721–725 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67791-9 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3c7ltVKksA%3D%3D Occurrence Handle10687964

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. RF Pateson DA Lifshitz JE Lingeman et al. (2002) ArticleTitleStone fragmentation during shock wave lithotripsy is improved by slowing the shock wave rate: studies with a new animal model J Urol 168 2211–2215

    Google Scholar 

  13. P Joseph AK Mondal SK Singh et al. (2002) ArticleTitleComputerized 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 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0022-5347(05)65064-1 Occurrence Handle11956419

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ahmed A. Shokeir.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Al-Ansari, A., As-Sadiq, K., Al-Said, S. et al. Prognostic Factors of Success of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) in the Treatment of Renal Stones. Int Urol Nephrol 38, 63–67 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-005-3155-z

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-005-3155-z

Keywords

Navigation