The transgluteal approach to shockwave lithotripsy to treat distal ureter stones: a prospective, randomized, and multicenter study

Factors influencing the efficacy of ultrasound-guided extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy in the treatment of ureteral stones: a retrospective study

The aim of the study was to analyze the factors influencing the efficacy of ultrasound-guided extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) in the treatment of ureteral stones. The clinical data of 8102 patients (6083 men and 2019 women) who presented with ureteral stones were retrospectively analyzed. All the patients were treated with ultrasound-guided ESWL. The stone-free rate (SFR) was calculated to evaluate the effect of ESWL. The characteristics of the patients and their stones, and the ESWL parameters applied were compared to identify the factors affecting the treatment outcomes. The SFR and that following one ESWL session were 94.6% (7663/8102) and 75.4% (6107/8102), respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that stone location (OR 0.656, p < 0.001), stone size (OR 1.103, p < 0.001), and degree of hydronephrosis (OR 1.952, p < 0.001) independently affected SFR; and age (OR 1.005, p = 0.022), stone location (OR 0.729, p < 0.001), stone size (OR 1.103, p < 0.001), degree of hydronephrosis (OR 1.387, p = 0.001), maximum energy level(OR 0.691, p < 0.001) independently affected SFR following one session. Ultrasound-guided ESWL is effective in all levels of ureteral stones. Large stone size and moderate hydronephrosis are correlated with treatment failure. Ultrasound-guided ESWL may be the first choice for distal ureteral stones.

Use of extracorporeal physical vibration lithecbole through greater sciatic foramen for treatment of distal ureteral calculi

Introduction To evaluate the efficacy and safety of preforming extracorporeal physical vibration lithecbole(EVPL)through greater sciatic foramen(GSF)for distal ureteral calculi(DUC) treatment. Materials and methods All patients with a diagnosis of DUC (6 - 10 mm in diameter) were enrolled in this study from October 2018 to May 2020. Patients were randomly divided into three groups receiving EPVL through GSF (Group A, n = 58), or abdominal (Group B, n = 60), or combined with oral use of tamsulosin at 0.4 mg daily (Group C, n = 63). Results There was no significant difference observed in terms of demographic characteristics or size of stones among the three groups (p >0.05). Compared with the group B and C, patients of the group A displayed a significantly higher score of comfort but with significantly decreased number of renal colic attacks or analgesics required (p < 0.01). The stone-free rate also significantly increased after one and two weeks of treatment (p < 0.01), despite such a significant difference among these groups vanished after four weeks of treatment. Conclusion Extracorporeal physical vibrational lithecbole in the prone position use the greater sciatic foramen as the path is the safe and effective approach to treat the distal ureter calculi.

Transgluteal versus prone approach to extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for patients with distal ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis

To explore the effectiveness of transgluteal approach during extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) for patients with distal ureteral stones compared to the prone approach. A systematic literature search was carried out by two reviewers independently on the basis of three electronic databases up to Aug. 2020. Three randomized controlled trials (RCT) and one cohort studies (CS), with a total of 516 patients, comparing transgluteal approach with prone approach during ESWL for distal ureteral stones were included. The methodological quality of RCT was evaluated by Cochrane collaboration's tools, and the quality of CS and CCS was evaluated by modified Newcatle-Ottawa scale. The weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratio (OR) was respectively used to describe results of continuous and dichotomous variables. Pooled data showed that transgluteal approach could significantly improve the rate of stone free after the first treatment [OR = 3.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.19-4.63, p < 0.00001] and the rate of overall stone free (OR = 4.03, 95% CI 2.43-6.69, p < 0.00001). In addition, compared with the prone approach, the transgluteal one could also significantly reduce the rate of ureteroscopy (OR = 0.21, 95% CI 0.12-0.36, p < 0.00001). What's more, complications were rarely reported, which demonstrated a similar safety for two approaches. Our study suggested that, during ESWL for patients with distal ureteral stones, transgluteal approach was a safe and more effective choice than the prone position.

Non-surgical treatment of urinary stone

Some patients with urinary stones can be managed non-surgically through observation, medication, or extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL). Symptomatic urinary stones can initially be treated conservatively using analgesics and hydration. When uncontrolled pain or infection is present, immediate diversion via either percutaneous nephrostomy or ureteral stenting may be necessary. Medical expulsive therapy utilizing alpha-blocker may benefit a selected group of patients with stones larger than 5 mm. Oral or percutaneous chemolysis is a well-established non-invasive option with a reasonable success rate for patients with a certain component such as uric acid. When medical treatment is applied, its unintended side effects should be considered and routinely monitored. Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy is a highly effective and safe modality in treating urinary stones when adequately indicated. In addition to the size and location of the stone, information obtained from non-enhanced computed tomography such as stone density, stone heterogenicity index, and stone-to-skin distance can be applied to predict the possibility of ESWL failure. Modifications in shock wave delivery by altering shock rate and voltage can improve shock wave efficacy. Urinary stones can be managed effectively and safely using non-surgical approaches.

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for distal ureteric stones: which is the ideal approach?

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety and efficacy of different approaches using ESWL for management of distal ureteric stone in an attempt to select the ideal one.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a prospective randomized single-center study conducted on patients with lower third single radiopaque ureteric stone with size less than 15 mm. Patients were randomized into three groups, group A: Supine transgluteal, group B: Modified prone and group C: Prone position (80 patients each). The success of the procedure was assessed by NCCT and is defined as complete stone removal or had only clinically insignificant fragments (< 3 mm) for a maximum of three sessions. The success rate, rate of complications, pain intensity by visual pain scale and patients' satisfaction rate were compared among the three study groups.

RESULTS

Data of 240 patients were analyzed (80 in each group). Overall, no significant difference has been observed among all groups regarding demographic data, stone and treatment characteristics. The overall success rates for treatment after the last session were 86.3%, 65% and 62.5% in the three study groups, respectively, with a statistically significant difference for group A. Regarding pain perception and complication rate, all groups were comparable. Patient satisfaction is significantly better in group A versus the other two groups.

CONCLUSION

Our study has confirmed better efficacy profile and patients' satisfaction rate of ESWL in the supine position (transgluteal approach) than other different known approaches for the treatment of distal ureteral stones.

The role of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the future of stone management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The most relevant recent findings on the use of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in adult population to provide an insight of its role in the current and future of stone treatment. Comparing ESWL with other modalities is not in the scope of this review.

RECENT FINDINGS

We conducted a PubMed/Embase search and reviewed recent publications that include relevant information on the development of ESWL. Low-rate shock waves improve stone breakage, ramping energy modalities improve stone fragmentation and have lower incidence of hematoma and kidney injury. Transgluteal approach is suggested to improve stone-free rates for distal ureteral stones in a single session. Proper coupling is the most important technical aspect of the treatment and coupling improvement can be achieved by optical monitorization. Triple D score is a promising tool in proper patient selection, but external validation is needed. Predictive information arising from computed tomography scans has been refined by the variant coefficient of stone density and 3D texture analysis that might improve outcomes in the future.

SUMMARY

Recent evidence suggests that modifying techniques and protocols, and better patient selection are the current trends for improving ESWL outcomes. EWSL will keep its role as the single noninvasive treatment in stone management with room for outcome improvement in the future.

Optimisation of shock wave lithotripsy: a systematic review of technical aspects to improve outcomes

Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) remains an important treatment option for the management of upper urinary tract stones. The optimisation of certain technical principles can help to improve the results of SWL. We performed a systematic review based on preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA) standards for studies reporting on technical aspects of SWL. A literature search was conducted on the PubMed database between January 1984 and November 2018 using 'shockwave lithotripsy' and 'stone' as keywords. Summaries and manuscripts of relevant articles were reviewed in order to select studies with the best level of evidence in each theme covered during the review. From 4,135 titles, 165 abstracts and full-text articles were reviewed. Overall, SWL has good outcomes in the treatment of upper urinary tract stones. It remains the only truly non-invasive stone treatment. While stone-free rate (SFR) might not be equivalent to ureteroscopy or percutaneous nephrolithotomy outcomes, SWL can be optimised by changing several technical factors, including type of machine, patient position, number, rate and energy of shocks, stone targeting, and patient analgesia. For each of these included SWL themes, relevant and selected studies with the highest level of evidence were described and discussed. Paired with these improved technical factors and appropriate patient selection, SWL, with its low complication rates, remains an excellent treatment option in 2019.