Medical ozone therapy reduces shock wave therapy-induced renal injury

The Protective Role of Ozone Therapy in Kidney Disease: A Review

Ozone (O3) is a reactive oxygen species (ROS) that can interact with cellular components and cause oxidative stress. Following said logic, if O3 induces such a stressful milieu, how does it exert antioxidant functions? This is mediated by controlled toxicity produced by low concentrations of O3, which enhance the cell’s suppliance of antioxidant properties without causing any further damage. Therapeutic concentrations vary extensively, although 50 µg/mL is commonly used in experimental and clinical procedures, given that augmented concentrations might work as germicides or cause endogenous damage. O3 therapy has been shown to be effective when applied before or after traumatic renal procedures, whether caused by ischemia, xenobiotics, chronic damage, or other models. In this review, we focus on discussing the role of O3 therapy in different models of kidney damage associated with fibrosis, apoptosis, oxidative stress, and inflammation. We integrate and report knowledge about O3 in renal therapy, debunking skepticism towards unconventional medicine, explaining its proven therapeutic properties, and thus providing background for its use in further research as well as in clinical settings.

A pilot study evaluating changes to haematological and biochemical tests after Flexible Ureterorenoscopy for the treatment of kidney stones

BACKGROUND

Currently there is limited research documenting the changes in blood parameters, following Flexible Ureterorenoscopy. This study aims to determine whether there are any changes in haematology and biochemistry parameters, following Flexible Ureterorenoscopy for the treatment of kidney stones.

METHODS

40 consecutive patients aged between 27-87 years (median 49 years) undergoing Flexible Ureterorenoscopy for the treatment of kidney stones were recruited (26 male, 14 female). Blood samples were collected from each patient at four time points: baseline (pre-operatively) followed by 30 minutes, 120 minutes and 240 minutes post-operatively. On these samples, routine haematological and biochemistry tests were carried out. In addition to the assessment of clinical parameters prospectively from the medical notes.

RESULTS

There was a significant decrease observed following Flexible Ureterorenoscopy in the following parameters: lymphocytes (p = 0.007), eosinophils (p = 0.001), basophils (p = 0.001), haemoglobin (p = 0.002), red blood cells (p = 0.001), platelet count (p = 0.001), fibrinogen concentration (p = 0.001), von Willebrand factor (p = 0.046), C reactive protein (p = 0.01), total protein (p = 0.001), albumin (p = 0.001), globulin (p = 0.001) and alkaline phosphatase (p = 0.001). In addition, there was a significant increase observed in the following parameters: white blood cells (p = 0.001), neutrophils (p = 0.001), activated partial thromboplastin time (p = 0.001), total bilirubin (p = 0.012), creatinine (p = 0.008), sodium (p = 0.002) and potassium (p = 0.001). Limiting factors for this study were the sample size, and restriction on the recruitment time points.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant changes were noted to occur in haematology and biochemistry parameters following Flexible Ureterorenoscopy. Some of the data presented in this study may represent the 'normal' post-operative response following FURS, as no major complications occurred, in the majority of our patients. This data on the 'normal response' will need to be validated but may ultimately aid clinicians in distinguishing patients at risk of complications, if reproduced in larger multi-centre studies.