Evaluation of renal functional changes after extracorporeal piezoelectric lithotripsy (EPL) by radionuclide studies

The true clinical significance of renography in nephro-urology

Isotopic renography is a non-invasive technique used routinely by the clinician to provide information about kidney structure and function. Whilst there is no doubt of its value in the accurate measurement of glomerular filtration rate and in the detection of parenchymal abnormalities, its role in the diagnosis of renovascular disease (especially in patients with renal insufficiency), the exclusion of obstruction and the evaluation of the patient with either acute renal failure or renal transplant dysfunction remains unproven. In part, this reflects a failure to standardise protocols and rigorously evaluate diagnostic techniques. Recent developments in ultrasound, computerised X-ray tomography and nuclear magnetic resonance now present the clinician with rival techniques and emphasise the need for the clinical development of isotopic renography.

Treatment philosophy and retreatment rates following piezoelectric lithotripsy

Second generation lithotriptors offer the advantage of anesthesia-free fragmentation of renal and ureteral calculi but they frequently require multiple treatments to attain a stone-free status. However, excessive single lithotripsy sessions or multiple treatments may be associated with significant damage to the kidney. For some clinicians a common treatment philosophy involves evaluation of serial plain abdominal films every 24 hours after lithotripsy and immediate retreatment of all patients with incomplete fragmentation. To avoid unnecessary retreatments and, thus, minimize potential renal damage, we prospectively evaluated 100 patients undergoing lithotripsy on a Wolf Piezolith 2300 device. Patients were routinely treated with 4,000 shocks at 1,100 bar. Serial plain abdominal films were obtained at 1 day and 2 weeks after lithotripsy. The need for retreatment was determined by the plain abdominal film results. Additional therapy was considered necessary if there was no stone fragmentation or if residual fragments measured greater than 4 mm. Of the patients whose plain abdominal film at 24 hours indicated the need for a repeat treatment 43% were stone-free on the 2-week film. Thus, these patients were spared an unnecessary treatment by allowing adequate time for the stone fragments to pass spontaneously. Our data suggest that repeat treatments on second generation lithotriptors should not be performed within 24 hours. Rather, the patient should be reevaluated at least 1 to 2 weeks later to avoid unnecessary retreatment with the attendant potential for renal injury. In addition, when comparing the retreatment rates of various lithotriptors, one should also consider the treatment philosophy used at the particular institution and the timing of the radiographic studies used to determine the stone-free status.