In situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of ureteral calculi with the MPL-9000X lithotriptor

Shock wave lithotripsy as a primary modality for treating upper ureteric stones: A 10-year experience

Aims and Objectives:

Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) has been recommended as a first-line treatment for upper ureteric calculi in several studies with a success rate of 80-90%. Our aim is to present our retrospective data of treatment of upper ureteric stones with SWL as primary modality over a 10-year period and evaluate the factors affecting fragmentation and clearance.

Materials and Methods:

From February 1997 to March 2007, 846 patients with upper ureteric stones were treated with SWL as the primary modality. Age: 9-69 years, 546 males and 300 females, stone size: 7-22 mm. Pyuria in 132/846 with clinical infection 40/132, pre-SWL JJ stenting: 40/846 and anesthesia in 41/846 patients. Duration of symptoms: < 4 weeks- 780/846, >4 weeks- 66/846. Stone size: < 1 cm- 513/846, >1 cm-333/846. Workup: X-Ray KUB, Urine and Uro-USG. Intravenous urogram (IVU): 130/846. Intraoperative (C-arm) fluoroscopic imaging was used. Presentation: colic-801/846, incidental-45/846. Criteria for clearance: symptomatic relief, X-ray and USG confirmation.

Results:

Clearance rate: < 1cm- 95.91% (492/513), >1 cm- 85.29% (284/333). Overall clearance rate: 91.73% (776/846). No clearance: 70/846 (8.27 %). In these, 59/70 underwent ureteroscopy, 8/70 percutaneous nephrolithotomy and 3/70 open ureterolithotomy for clearance. Post SWL complications were seen in 25 (3%) cases with septicemia in nine and stein strasse in 16 cases. Duration of symptoms < 4 weeks - 93.7% success (731/780), >4 weeks – 68.1% (45/66). Non-stented – 92% (744/806) success. Stented group–80% (32/40).

Conclusions:

Best results with SWL as monotherapy for upper ureteric stones are achieved when stones are less than 1 cm in size, of short duration history and without indwelling stents. Overall success rate – 91.73%.

Impact of the degree of hydronephrosis on the efficacy of in situ extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy for proximal ureteral calculi

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a prospective randomized study to investigate the relation between the degree of stone-induced hydronephrosis and the outcome of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in patients with lumbar ureter stones.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 284 patients with solitary lumbar ureter stones with or without hydronephrosis were treated with ESWL. The degree of hydronephrosis was determined by means of renal ultrasound. Patients were divided into four groups according to the degree of stone-induced hydronephrosis. The results were analyzed by comparing stone-free rates, the number of shock waves, the number of sessions, the incidence of complications, secondary interventions and time to stone clearance.

RESULTS

The mean stone size was 11.4+/-2.6 mm. In the hydronephrotic group, the stone-free rate was 80.3%, compared to 89.1% in patients without hydronephrosis (p=0.12). The mean time to stone clearance was 13.8+/-9.8 days. Differences among the four groups in terms of stone size and treatment outcome were not significant. However, the presence of hydronephrosis was highly associated with repeat treatment (2.4 vs 1.7 treatments; p<0.001) and prolonged clearance time (16.2 vs 11.6 days; p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In cases with solitary lumbar ureter stones, the degree of hydronephrosis caused by the stone does not affect the overall treatment success with ESWL. However, stones in obstructed systems are associated with a tendency for repeat treatment and a prolonged time for stone clearance.

Prognostic factors for extracorporeal shock‐wave lithotripsy of ureteric stonesA multivariate analysis study

OBJECTIVE

To define factors that have a significant impact on the stone-free rate after extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) of ureteric stones using multivariate analysis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between February 1992 and February 2002, a total of 938 patients with ureteric stones were treated with in situ ESWL using the Dornier MFL 5000 lithotripter. The outcome of treatment was evaluated after 3 months and failure was defined as the presence of any residual stones. The stone-free rate was correlated with patient characteristics (age, sex and radiological renal picture) and stone features (site, side, length, width, nature, opacity and the presence of ureteral stents). Factors with a significant impact on the stone-free rate using the chi (2) test were further analyzed using multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, the stone-free rate was 88.7%. Repeat treatment was required in 50.4% of cases. Post-ESWL complications were observed in 32 cases (3.4%), including static steinstrasse in 19 (2%). Auxiliary procedures were needed in 28 cases (3%). Using the chi (2) test, only three factors had a significant impact on the stone-free rate, namely stone site, the transverse diameter of the stone and the presence of a ureteral stent. The stone-free rate was highest for stones located in the lumbar ureter (436/470; 92.8%) and lowest for those located in the pelvic ureter (268/324; 82.7%) (p = 0.0017). Stones with a transverse diameter of < or =1 cm were associated with a stone-free rate of 89.7% (715/797), compared to 83% (114/141) for those with a transverse diameter of >1 cm (p = 0.017). Non-stented patients had a stone-free rate of 89.8% (732/815), compared to 81.3% (100/123) for stented patients (p = 0.006). On multivariate analysis, these three factors maintained their statistical significance. A logistic regression model was designed to estimate the probability of stone-free status after ESWL.

CONCLUSION

The site and transverse diameter of the stone and the presence of a ureteral stent are the only significant predictors of success of ESWL therapy for ureteric stones.

Prediction of success of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the treatment of ureteric stones

OBJECTIVES

To define the factors that affect the success rate of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for the treatment of ureteric stones.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between January 2000 and December 2003, 468 patients with ureteric stones underwent in situ ESWL 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. Characteristics of the patients, condition of the urinary tract and stone features were correlated to the success rate to define the significant predictors of success.

RESULTS

At 3-month follow-up, the overall success rate was 394/468 (84.2%). Repeat treatment was required in 239 patients (51.1%). Post-ESWL auxiliary procedures were necessary in 58 patients (12.4%). Post-ESWL complications were observed in 11 patients (2.4%). Only three factors had a significant impact on the stone-free rate, namely stone site, stone width and the presence of a ureteral stent. The stone-free rate was highest for stones located in the lumbar ureter (159/183; 86.9%) and lowest for those in iliac ureter (28/40; 70%) (P < 0.05). Stones with a transverse diameter <8 mm were associated with a stone-free rate of 89.9% (248/276), compared to 66.7% (128/192) for those with a transverse diameter of >8 mm (P < 0.01). Non-stented patients had a stone-free rate of 89.2% (313/348), compared to 75.2% (85/113) for stented patients (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The site and transverse diameter of the stone and the presence of a ureteral stent are the only significant predictors of success of ESWL therapy for ureteric stones.

Is Pre-Shock Wave Lithotripsy Stenting Necessary for Ureteral Stones With Moderate or Severe Hydronephrosis?

PURPOSE

We performed a prospective, randomized clinical trial to evaluate the outcome of ureteral stents for solitary ureteral stones 2 cm or less in moderately or severely obstructed systems using shock wave lithotripsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 2001 and 2004, 186 patients who met study criteria were randomized into 2 groups. Group 1 received a pre-shock wave lithotripsy 6Fr Double-J stent and group 2 had no stent. Patients were treated with a Dornier MFL 5000 lithotripter. Results were compared in terms of clearance rates, number of shock waves and sessions, irritative voiding symptoms, incidence of complications and secondary interventions. Failure was defined as the need for additional procedure(s) for stone extraction.

RESULTS

Overall 164 patients (88.2%) became stone-free after shock wave lithotripsy. Complete stone fragmentation was achieved after 1 to 3 and more than 3 session in 108 (58.1%), 30 (16.1%), 13 (7%) and 14 patients (7.5%), respectively. Ureteral stent insertion did not affect the stone-free rate, which was 84.9% and 91.4% in groups 1 and 2, respectively (p = 0.25). There was no statistical difference in the re-treatment rate, flank pain or temperature in the 2 groups. However, all patients in the stented group significantly complained of side effects attributable to the stent, including dysuria, suprapubic pain, hematuria, pyuria and positive urinary culture.

CONCLUSIONS

Pretreatment stenting provides no advantage over in situ shock wave lithotripsy for significantly obstructing ureteral calculi. Shock wave lithotripsy is reasonable initial therapy for ureteral stones 2 cm or less that cause moderate or severe hydronephrosis.

Shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral stones in elderly male patients

INTRODUCTION

Age has never been considered as a factor in the treatment of ureteral stones, but elderly male patients may suffer from concomitant illnesses that may affect SWL results, such as voiding difficulties and musculo-skeletal and cardio-vascular disorders. The aim of this study was to assess the success rate and complications of shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) for all size and location ureteral stones in patients older than 70 years of age.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the charts and radiology films of all patients who had undergone SWL for ureteral stones with the HM3 lithotriptor and compared the results of patients younger than 70 years to those older than 70 years.

RESULTS

During 2000-2003, 238 consecutive male patients (23 older than 70 years) underwent SWL under regional anesthesia for all size and locations ureteral stones. Stone sizes, locations, opacity, and pre-operative drainage procedures matched in both groups. The overall stone-free rate was 91% for both groups. Complications were recorded in 1% of the older patients and 3.7% of the younger ones. No treatment-related mortality was recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

Age itself has no effect on the success rate of SWL with the HM3 lithotripter for ureteral stones. In general, SWL treatment showed a high success rate with minimal morbidity and no treatment-related mortality.

Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy For Solitary Distal Ureteral Stones: Does the Degree of Urinary Obstruction Affect Success?

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) is a safe and effective way to treat stones in the distal ureter, but the impact of urinary obstruction on outcome is not clear. We investigated the relation between the degree of stone-induced urinary obstruction and the outcome of SWL treatment in patients with solitary distal ureteral stones.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A series of 165 consecutive patients with solitary distal ureteral stones underwent SWL (Multimed 9200 Lithotriptor, Elmed Medical Systems, Turkey) between October 2002 and September 2003 at two separate centers. Distal ureteral stones were defined as those located below the lower border of the sacroiliac joint. Patients were divided into four groups according to the degree of stone-induced urinary obstruction: group I (N = 62) had no urinary system dilation; group II (N = 40) had mild dilation, group III (N = 35) moderate dilation, and group IV (N = 28) severe dilation. In addition to degree of obstruction, stone size, average fluoroscopy time, total number of shockwaves applied, number of sessions required to achieve stone-free status, and stone clearance time were recorded. Treatment failure was defined as persistence of fragments after three SWL sessions.

RESULTS

Overall, 152 (92.1%) of the patients became stone free after SWL. There were no statistically significant differences among the groups with respect to any of the factors studied.

CONCLUSION

In cases where there is a solitary calculus in the distal ureter, the degree of urinary obstruction caused by the stone does not affect the success of stone clearance with SWL.

Current management of urolithiasis: progress or regress?

PURPOSE

To assess the impact of the development of less powerful second- and third-generation shockwave lithotripters on surgical stone therapy in light of recent advances in ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy. As such, we sought to identify current trends in the treatment of stone disease, both at our university medical center and nationally, and to contrast them with the corresponding data from 1990.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All urolithiasis procedures (ureteroscopy, SWL, open surgery, and percutaneous stone removal) performed in 1998 were compared with all urolithiasis procedures performed 8 years earlier (1990) at a single institution (Washington University, St. Louis). In addition, Medicare data for each year from 1988 through 2000 were collected from the Health Care Financing Administration to assess the national trends for open stone surgery, ureteroscopic stone removal, SWL, and percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

RESULTS

At Washington University, the number of percutaneous stone removals remained stable; however, the overall number of ureteroscopies increased by 53%, while the number of SWLs, decreased by 15%. The Medicare data likewise reflect a marked decrease in open stone surgery and a marked increase in ureteroscopic stone surgery with a slight increase in SWL. Utilization of percutaneous nephrolithotomy remained unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS

We believe this trend toward ureteroscopy is attributable to several factors: improved, smaller rigid and flexible ureteroscopes; the availability of more effective intracorporeal lithotripters (e.g., pneumatic and holmium laser), and the lack of development of lower cost, more effective SWL. This is an unfortunate trend, as we are moving away from the noninvasive treatment that was the hallmark of urolithiasis therapy at the beginning of the last decade toward more invasive endoscopic therapy. Increased research efforts in SWL technology are sorely needed.

Role of adjunctive medical therapy with nifedipine and deflazacort after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of ureteral stones

OBJECTIVES

To increase the success rate of the first treatment of ureteral stones through extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), we tested the efficacy of a medical therapy with nifedipine and deflazacort administered to patients who had undergone ESWL for ureteral stones.

METHODS

This prospective study lasted from October 1998 to September 2000 and involved 80 patients. All the patients underwent ESWL with Sonolith 4000+. The patients were randomly divided into two groups: 40 patients (group 1) received an "adjunctive" treatment with oral medical therapy (nifedipine and deflazacort); the other 40 patients (group 2) were used as the control group.

RESULTS

Complete fragment expulsion occurred in 30 (75%) of the 40 patients of group 1 and in 20 (50%) of the 40 patients of group 2 at the endpoint. A statistically significant difference was observed in the stone-free rate (P = 0.02). Concerning the symptomatic therapy, the average diclofenac use was 37.5 mg per patient in group 1 and 86.25 mg per patient in group 2 (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study have shown the role that adjunctive medical therapy with nifedipine and deflazacort given after an ESWL procedure can play in increasing the success rate of ureteral stone treatment. Furthermore, these results would suggest that adjunctive medical therapy can reduce total analgesic consumption after the ESWL procedure.

Impact of power index, hydroureteronephrosis, stone size, and composition on the efficacy of in situ boosted ESWL for primary proximal ureteral calculi

OBJECTIVES

The efficacy, safety, feasibility, and outcome of in situ treatment applied to select proximal ureteral calculi was assessed and analyzed with a view to avoiding auxiliary interventions and providing high clearance rates in the shortest possible time. We studied the impact of several clinically important variables, including power index, degree of hydroureteronephrosis (HDUN), stone size, and composition on the efficacy of sequential in situ boosted extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in a select group. The power index requirement for the in situ boosted protocol and the impact of the stone size/composition, degree of HDUN, and clearance rates were also analyzed.

METHODS

An in situ (no instrumentation) boosted protocol was applied to 130 primary unimpacted proximal ureteral calculi with no prior intervention. A typical session with the Siemens Lithostar Plus comprised 3000 shock waves, in installments of 500, deployed at a power setting of 1 to 4 kV with a gradual stepwise escalation. Sequential boosted additional sessions of ESWL were administered on days 2, 7, and 14, tailored to the degree of fragmentation, clearance status, and amount of residual stone bulk. Several parameters (shock waves, kilovolts used, fluoroscopy time, number of sessions, stone size, composition, fragmentation, clearance, and HDUN) were recorded and the results analyzed statistically.

RESULTS

The results were excellent in 83.8%, with a mean duration to complete clearance of 11.3 days. In situ ESWL failed in 7.69%, and the auxiliary intervention rate was 10.7%. Pre-ESWL HDUN was present in 78.3%, the mean power index was 184.6/session/case, and the average stone burden was 8.9 mm(2). Calcium oxalate monohydrate was the most common stone (56%). Renal colic was the most common side effect observed. The power index, fragmentation at the first session, and stone size were found to be the most favorable significant variables affecting stone clearance. The degree of HDUN, number of sessions, and stone composition did not significantly impact the clearance rates.

CONCLUSIONS

In situ boosted ESWL should be the first-line therapeutic modality in select unimpacted primary proximal ureteral stones.

Therapeutic efficacy of Dornier MPL 9000 for prevesical calculi as judged by efficiency quotient

PURPOSE

To study the efficacy and safety of the Dornier MPL 9000 lithotripter in the treatment of prevesical calculi using real-time ultrasound monitoring and to see if efficacy is adequately judged by the efficiency quotient (EQ).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seventy-six patients underwent ultrasound-guided extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) for prevesical calculi over a period of 43 months. Their age ranged from 8 to 68 (mean 37.6) years, and the male:female ratio was 2.6:1. The size of the stones, measured in two dimensions, ranged from 4 to 25 mm (mean 9.3 mm) and 2 to 15 mm (mean 6.0 mm). No general or regional anesthesia or ureteral stents were used, and all patients were treated in the prone position. The EQ was calculated using the formula: Stone free (%) x 100/(100 + retreatment rate (%) + auxiliary procedures (%).

RESULTS

Seventy patients were stone free in a mean time of 15 +/- 14.11 days. The average number of shockwaves used was 2,831 +/- 1,612, and the average number of sessions per patient was 1.7. About 92% of the patients were rendered stone free using in situ SWL alone. No major complication was encountered, and none of the patients required an inpatient stay after SWL. The EQ was 65. Five patients with failed SWL subsequently were rendered stone free, four with salvage ureteroscopy and pneumatic lithotripsy and one with cystolitholapaxy for a symptomatic fragment in the bladder. One patient was lost to follow-up.

CONCLUSION

In situ SWL is a safe and effective treatment for prevesical calculi. It should be used as a first-line treatment for most such stones. Efficiency can be assessed objectively by the EQ.

Primary treatment of ureteral stones by new multiline lithotripter

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

During the last 15 years, a second and a third generation of lithotripters have been developed. We present the results achieved by primary extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) of ureteral calculi treated with the new Multiline Lithotripter (Siemens).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From April 1996 until February 1997, 50 men and 17 women ages 19 to 82 (mean 50.9) years, underwent SWL as a primary treatment of ureteral stones at the Department of Urology, University of Düsseldorf. Data were analyzed retrospectively. More than half (60%) of the 67 patients had left ureteral stones. The most frequent site was proximal (46%) followed by distal (37%). The mean stone diameter was 9 mm. A total of 118 treatments were performed.

RESULTS

The success rates of SWL monotherapy for upper, mid, and lower ureteral calculi were 71%, 82%, and 72%, respectively. Although in 62% of the cases, complete, and in 33% partial, stone disintegration was achieved, auxiliary procedures (ureteral stenting, nephrostomy, and ureteroscopy) were necessary in 43% of the patients. Renal hematoma occurred in two patients, who were treated for upper ureteral calculi. Two thirds of the patients were discharged from the hospital free of stones.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary SWL treatment of ureteral stones with the new Multiline showed good results in about 84% of cases, although 43% of patients required auxiliary procedures. The occurrence of renal hematoma after the treatment of upper ureteral stones is an unexpected complication and makes reduction of the applied energy necessary if the kidney lies within the field of shockwave application.

Piezoelectric lithotripsy of ureteral stones: influence of shockwave frequency on sedation and therapeutic efficiency

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this randomized study was to assess the relation between shockwave frequency, sedation, and efficiency in piezoelectric extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) for ureteral calculi.

METHODS

A random sample of 114 patients aged between 15 and 74 (mean 45) years were treated at the shockwave frequencies of 1 (N = 57) or 4 (N = 57) per second using the EDAP LT 02 lithotripter at maximum energy. The stones' largest diameter ranged from 5 to 18 mm (mean 7.6 mm). Lower ureteral stones were treated with the patient in the prone position and upper ureteral stones in supine position. The duration of SWL sessions and stone measurements were statistically similar for patients treated at low and high frequencies. The levels of required sedation (none, intramuscular analgesia, intravenous sedation-analgesia) and stone-free rates after one session were analyzed by Student's t-test or Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

Sedation did not differ statistically with SWL frequency for mid and lower ureteral calculi. However, the use of intravenous sedation-analgesia was less common for patients with upper ureteral stones treated at low rather than high frequency (19% and 100%, respectively; P < 0.0001). The success rate was significantly lower (P = 0.04) for lower ureteral calculi treated at low v high frequency (65 % and 89%, respectively) but was not statistically affected by frequency for upper ureteral stones.

CONCLUSION

We recommend high frequency for piezoelectric SWL of lower ureteral calculi, especially for stones with a maximum diameter > or =8 mm. On the other hand, low-frequency SWL appears to be suitable for the treatment of upper ureteral stones.

Two-year experience with ureteral stones: extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy v ureteroscopic manipulation

Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) and ureteroscopic manipulation became the standard treatments for ureteral stones in recent years. There still exists significant debate as to the most appropriate treatment modality for ureteral stones. During a period of 2 years, from January 1994 to December 1995, 651 patients with ureteral stones were treated, and 589 patients were retrospectively reviewed, excluding 62 patients with incomplete follow-up. Four hundred forty-two patients were treated with SWL using the MPL 9000 with ultrasonic guidance and 115 patients with ureteroscopic manipulations using 7.9F to 11.5F rigid and semirigid ureteroscopes. In SWL treatments, the overall stone-free rate was 74.7% with one session. The stone-free rate was significantly affected by the size of stones, being 83.6% when the stone was <1.0 cm and 42.1% when the stone was >1.0 cm. The stone-free rate after a second SWL session was 84.4% and was 90.3% after a third session. The stone-free rates according to the site of the stone were 72.4 (proximal), 70.0 (mid), and 80.2% (distal) after a single session. In ureteroscopic manipulation, an overall stone-free rate of 87.8% was obtained regardless of the size of the stones. The success rates according to the location of stones were 75.0 (proximal), 94.6 (mid), and 86.4% (distal). Open ureterolithotomy was performed in 32 patients, with a 100% success rate. In our study, the size of the stones was the most important factor influencing the success rate of SWL treatment. We consider ureteroscopic manipulation as the first-line treatment modality when the stone is >1.0 cm, especially if it is in the distal ureter. Proper selection of patients for in situ SWL or ureteroscopy would improve the results of initial treatment.

Echo-guided SWL of vesical stones with Dornier MPL 9000 lithotripter in obstructed and unobstructed patients

Sixty-one patients with vesical stones (38 with underlying obstructive conditions and 23 unobstructed) underwent SWL using ultrasound targeting under no regional or general anesthesia. A foley catheter was not routinely employed, and the bladder was filled in a physiologic way. Complete resolution was obtained in 47 patients (78%); in particular, 66% of the obstructed patients and 96% of the unobstructed patients became stone free in one to four SWL sessions. The average number of sessions for all patients was 1.28+/-0.63. Fragments were completely evacuated also in some patients with severe obstruction and in all three patients with neurogenic bladder dysfunction. The size and number of stones did not seem to play a limiting role in SWL effectiveness: the principal limiting factor was the hardness of the stone. No severe complications occurred. However, in six patients (10%), some fragments stopped in the urethra, causing acute urine retention, and endoscopic extraction was necessary. Echo-guided SWL of bladder stones is safe and highly effective in nonobstructed patients and can be considered the elective monotherapy method. In obstructed patients, SWL efficacy is lower, but the method may be suggested for patients who refuse or delay other, more invasive techniques.

Ureteric pelvic stones

There is still controversy among urologists on the best treatment for ureteric pelvic stones. Recent advances in ureteroscopy with new methods of stone fragmentation (laser, electrohydraulic and ballistic lithotripsy) and current availability of small semirigid and flexible ureteroscopes have made this procedure rapid, easy and safe. Similarly, improvement in ESWL technology has also facilitated identification and treatment of stones above the iliac bone ring. In just over eight years (3/'88 - 6/'96) we treated 355 ureteral pelvic stones. The first approach was ESWL in 252 cases (by Dornier HM3 in 176, Dornier MPL 9000 in 42, Piezolith Wolf 2300 in 39 and EM plus Dormia basket in 15), ureteroscopy in 38 (by electrohydraulic) lithotripsy in 31, ultrasound lithotripsy in 5 and Lithoclast in 2) and litholapaxy by Dormia basket in 58. The overall stone-free rate was 75.5%, 95.3% and 84.5% respectively. The second line of treatment in unsuccessful cases was ULL or Dormia basket extraction and ESWL in 7 cases only. The overall success rate was 100%. Only 3 patients underwent open surgery (0.7%). There were 5 cases of ureteral perforation during ULL, which did not require surgical repair. No major complications occurred with either ESWL or Dormia basket procedures. We consider in-situ ultrasound-guided ESWL as first choice in managing ureteral pelvic stones, as the procedure is rapid, safe and technically simple. Ureteroscopy is a salvage procedure after ESWL failure. Endoscopic removal by Dormia basket is still a safe, effective procedure for small stones.

Electrohydraulic lithotripsy of upper ureteral calculi with semirigid ureteroscope

Forty-three patients with single ureteral calculi located above the pelvic brim were treated by electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) using a semirigid mini-ureteroscope. Of the 43 calculi, 36 (84%) were fragmented in one procedure. Six calculi (14%) were pushed back to the renal pelvis and treated successfully by complementary extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL). The total success rate of ureteroscopic manipulation thus was 98%. The operation time (mean 26.4 minutes) and postoperative hospital stay (mean 2.53 days) were relatively short. Complications were limited to four (9%) minor perforations of the ureter managed by internal stenting. Among these patients with complications, there were no significant ureteral strictures noted on excretory urography or ureteroscopic examination 1 to 3 months after ureterolithotripsy. The costs of ureteroscopy with EHL are lower than that of SWL or ureteroscopic lasertripsy. The total fees for ureteroscopy with EHL are about two thirds those for SWL in Taiwan. Despite the longer learning curve required for ureteroscopy, ureteroscopy associated with EHL is a cost-effective alternative for the treatment of upper ureteral calculi, especially when SWL is not readily available.

Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: the results of an initial series, and an evaluation of its role in the management of ureteric calculi

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the place of laparoscopic ureterolithotomy in the management of ureteric calculi for which extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) and endourological techniques are unsuitable.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy was attempted in nine patients (eight men, one woman) with an age range of 26-81 years (mean 55.5) who had large, long standing and impacted calculi in the upper and mid ureter. The stone size ranged from 5 to 28 mm (mean 13.2) and stone duration ranged from one to 24 months (mean 8.2). The transperitoneal route was used in six patients and the extraperitoneal route in three but was converted to a transperitoneal approach in two.

RESULTS

The stone was successfully removed in all nine patients. The operative time ranged from 80 to 260 minutes (mean 158). No intra-operative complication was encountered and no patient required a blood transfusion. Post-operative complications included urinary leak and fever. The post-operative stay ranged from 2 to 13 days (mean 5.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy has definite advantages over open ureterolithotomy. Furthermore, the more difficult a stone is for treatment by ESWL and endourological techniques, the more suitable it is for laparoscopic removal. For large, hard, long-standing and impacted ureteric calculi, one laparoscopic ureterolithotomy as initial therapy may be preferable to multiple endourological and ESWL procedures.

Should upper ureteral calculi be manipulated before extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy? A prospective controlled trial

Whether all upper ureteral stones must be manipulated before extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL*) is an ongoing controversy. In a prospective trial, symptomatic patients with solitary upper ureteral calculi less than 1 year in duration were alternated between ESWL in situ and pre-ESWL stone manipulation. Pretreatment excretory urograms were assessed for stone size and degree of proximal hydroureteronephrosis, which was graded from zero (no dilatation) to 3 (severe dilatation). Stone manipulation was done with the patient under intravenous sedation and local anesthesia. A total of 4,000 shock waves was given in a single session using Siemens Lithostar Plus, and treatment was repeated on days 4, 15 and 30 if required. The patients were evaluated 3 months after onset of therapy with excretory urogram and urine culture. Seventy patients qualified for the study (group 1-35 in situ and group 2-35 stone manipulation) and were comparable in relation to age and sex, stone size and degree of hydronephrosis. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups regarding the number of sessions (group 1-1.86 +/- 1.2 and group 2-2.03 +/- 1.2) or shock wave requirement (group 1-5,705.8 +/- 3,536.9 and group 2-5,549.1 +/- 3,837.2) for stone fragmentation. The degree of proximal dilatation did not contribute significantly towards the outcome (F ratio 0.675, p = 0.57). A total of 30 patients (85.5%) in group 1 had a satisfactory outcome at 3 months, while 3 (8.5%) had significant residual calculi and 2 stones could not be fragmented. Of the manipulated stones 33 (94%) were successfully cleared, while 2 patients required auxiliary procedures. Ureteroscopy was required in 1 patient for upward migration of the stent. Morbidity in both groups was comparable. We conclude that upper ureteral stones should be treated in situ to avoid the morbidity of manipulation.

Optimal therapy for the distal ureteral stone: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL not equal to) is the optimal therapy for renal calculi less than 2 cm. in diameter and for proximal ureteral calculi. Controversy continues over the initial approach to distal ureteral calculi (that is below the bony pelvis): in situ ESWL versus ureteroscopy. Since February 1990, 76 distal ureteral calculi were treated at our institution using either in situ ESWL (Dornier HM3 ESWL with a Stryker frame modification in 27 patients or Siemen's Lithostar electromagnetic ESWL in 22) or ureteroscopy (27 patients). Patient age and stone size were similar among the groups. All ESWL treatments were performed with the patient under intravenous sedation and on an outpatient basis. Stone-free rates were 96% for the HM3 device, 84% for the Lithostar and 100% for ureteroscopy. Retreatment was required in 3 Lithostar cases (14%) and 1 HM3 case (4%). When compared to ESWL ureteroscopy for distal ureteral stones was more time-consuming, entailed routine placement of a ureteral stent, often required general anesthesia, more often led to hospitalization and doubled the convalescence period. From a cost standpoint, ESWL on an HM3 unit was a few hundred dollars more expensive than ureteroscopy. In summary, we believe that in situ ESWL provides optimal first line therapy for distal ureteral calculi, while ureteroscopy is better reserved as a salvage procedure should ESWL fail.

ESWL ureterale “in situ” con MPL 9000

We report our experience on MPL 9000 extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, with ultrasonography and radiographic targeting, in the treatment of 109 patients with single (103) or multiple (6) ureteral stones in a lumbar (72) or pelvic (37) position. This technique has proved to be the treatment of choice due to the high percentage of total stone elimination, lack of anaesthesia, few complications and excellent compliance by the patient.