Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Urolithiasis
Published in: Urolithiasis 5/2015

01-10-2015 | Invited Review

Arguments for choosing extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for removal of urinary tract stones

Authors: Hans-Göran Tiselius, Christian G. Chaussy

Published in: Urolithiasis | Issue 5/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

At a time when there is an almost unlimited enthusiasm and preference among urologists for endoscopic stone removal, we have found it essential to meet some of the frequently presented arguments on why extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) should not be used. We have based our considerations in this brief article on our 30–35 years’ experience with the non-invasive or least invasive technique that SWL represents. Stone disintegration, requirement of repeated treatment sessions, the concern of residual fragments, complications and economic aspects are some points that are discussed.
Literature
1.
Scales CJ, Lai J, Dick A, Hanley JM, van Meijgaard J, Setodji C, Saigal C (2014) Urologic Diseases in America Project. Comparative effectiveness of shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for treating patients with kidney stones. JAMA Surg 149:648–653CrossRefPubMed
2.
Chaussy CG, Tiselius H (2012) What you should know about extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and how to improve your performance. In: Talati JJ, Tiselius H-G, Albala D, Ye Z (eds) Urolithiasis. Springer, London, pp 383–393
3.
Tiselius HG, Chaussy CG (2012) Aspects on how extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy should be carried out in order to be maximally effective. Urol Res 40:433–446CrossRefPubMed
4.
Neisius A, Lipkin ME, Rassweiler JJ, Zhong P, Preminger GM, Knoll T (2015) Shock wave lithotripsy: the new phoenix? World J Urol 33:213–221CrossRefPubMed
5.
Yuruk E, Binbay M, Ozgor F, Sekerel L, Berberoglu Y, Muslumanoglu AY (2015) Comparison of shockwave lithotripsy and flexible ureteroscopy for the treatment of kidney stones in patients with a solitary kidney. J Endourol 29:463–467CrossRefPubMed
6.
Tiselius HG (2008) How efficient is extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy with modern lithotripters for removal of ureteral stones? J Endourol 22:249–255CrossRefPubMed
7.
Tiselius H-G (2012) Shock-wave treatment of renal calculi (Chapter 51). In: Smith AD, Badlani GH, Preminger GM, Kavoussi LR (eds) Smith’s textbook of endourology, 3rd edn. Wiley-Blackwell, New York, pp 576–597
8.
9.
Tailly GG, Baert JA, Hente KR, Tailly TO (2008) Twenty years of single center experience in ESWL 1987–2007: an evaluation of 3079 patients. J Endourol 22:2211–2222CrossRefPubMed
10.
Rassweiler J, Renner C, Chaussy C, Thüroff S (2001) Treatment of renal stones by extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: an update. Eur Urol 39:187–199CrossRefPubMed
11.
12.
Türk C, Knoll T, Petrik A, Sarica K, Skolarikos M, Straub M, Seitz C (2015) Guidelines on urolithiasis. In: European Association of Urology Guidelines, 2015 edition
13.
Celik S, Bozkurt O, Kaya FG, Egriboyun S, Demir O, Secil M, Celebi I (2015) Evaluation of computed tomography findings for success prediction after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for urinary tract stone disease. Int Urol Nephrol 47:69–73CrossRefPubMed
14.
Shah K, Kurien A, Mishra S, Ganpule A, Muthu V, Sabnis RB, Desai M (2010) Predicting effectiveness of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy by stone attenuation value. J Endourol 24:1169–1173CrossRefPubMed
15.
Knoll T, Schubert AB, Fahlenkamp D, Leusmann DB, Wendt-Nordahl G, Schubert G (2011) Urolithiasis through the ages: data on more than 200,000 urinary stone analyses. J Urol 185:1304–1311CrossRefPubMed
16.
Daudon M, Donsimon IR, Hennequin C, Fellahi S, Le Moel G, Paris M, Troupel S, Lacour B (1995) Sex- and age-related composition of 10 617 calculi analyzed by infrared spectroscopy. Urol Res 23:319–326CrossRefPubMed
17.
Sener NC, Imamoglu MA, Bas O, Ozturk U, Goktug HN, Tuygun C, Bakirtas H (2014) Prospective randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and flexible ureterorenoscopy for lower pole stones smaller than 1 cm. Urolithiasis 42:127–131CrossRefPubMed
18.
Ringdén I, Tiselius HG (2007) Composition and clinically determined hardness of urinary tract stones. Scand J Urol Nephrol 41:316–323CrossRefPubMed
19.
Tiselius HG (2009) Considerations on the management of patients with residual stone material after active removal of urinary tract stones. Turk J Urol 35:304–309
20.
Rassweiler JJ, Knoll T, Köhrmann KU, McAteer JA, Lingeman JE, Cleveland RO, Bailey MR, Chaussy C (2011) Shock wave technology and application: an update. Eur Urol 59:784–796PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
21.
Tiselius H-G (2012) Shockwave lithotripsy of stones in the lower pole. In: Oral presentation at the international urolithiasis symposium, Ouro-Preto (not published)
22.
Albanis S, Ather HM, Papatsoris AG, Masood J, Staios D, Sheikh T, Akhtar S, Buchholz N (2009) Inversion, hydration and diuresis during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: does it improve the stone-free rate for lower pole stone clearance? Urol Int 83:211–216CrossRefPubMed
23.
Chiong E, Hwee ST, Kay LM, Liang S, Kamaraj R, Esuvaranathan K (2005) Randomized controlled study of mechanical percussion, diuresis, and inversion therapy to assist passage of lower pole renal calculi after shock wave lithotripsy. Urology 65:1070–1074CrossRefPubMed
24.
Pace KT, Tariq N, Dyer SJ, Weir MJ, D’a Honey RJ (2001) Mechanical percussion, inversion and diuresis for residual lower pole fragments after shock wave lithotripsy: a prospective, single blind, randomized controlled study. J Urol 166:2065–2071CrossRefPubMed
25.
Leong W, Liong M, Liong Y, Wu D, Lee S (2014) Does simultaneous inversion during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy improve stone clearance: a long-term, prospective, single-blind, randomized controlled study. Urology 83:40–44CrossRefPubMed
26.
Liu LR, Li QJ, Wei Q, Liu ZH, Xu Y (2013) Percussion, diuresis, and inversion therapy for the passage of lower pole kidney stones following shock wave lithotripsy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 12:CD008569
27.
Ahmed AF, Shalaby E, Maarouf A, Badran Y, Eladl M, Ghobish A (2015) Diuresis and inversion therapy to improve clearance of lower caliceal stones after shock wave lithotripsy: a prospective, randomized, controlled, clinical study. Indian J Urol 31:125–131PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
28.
Fine JK, Pak CYC, Preminger GM (1995) Effect of medical management and residual fragments on recurrent stone formation following shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 153:27–33CrossRefPubMed
29.
Leykamm L, Tiselius HG (2007) Observations on intrarenal geometry of the lower-caliceal system in relation to clearance of stone fragments after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. J Endourol 21:386–392CrossRefPubMed
30.
Sampaio FJ, Aragao AH (1994) Limitations of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for lower caliceal stones: anatomic insight. J Endourol 8:241–247CrossRefPubMed
31.
Talas H, Kilic O, Tangal S, Safak M (2007) Does lower-pole caliceal anatomy predict stone clearance after shock wave lithotripsy for primary lower-pole nephrolithiasis? Urol Int 79:129–132CrossRefPubMed
32.
Turna B, Ekren F, Nazli O, Akbay K, Altay B, Ozyurt C, Cikili N (2007) Comparative results of shockwave lithotripsy for renal calculi in upper, middle, and lower calices. J Endourol 21:951–956CrossRefPubMed
33.
de la Rosette J, Denstedt J, Geavlete P, Keeley F, Matsuda T, Pearle M, Preminger G, Traxer O, Group CUS (2014) The clinical research office of the endourological society ureteroscopy global study: indications, complications, and outcomes in 11,885 patients. J Endourol 28:131–139CrossRefPubMed
34.
Fuller A, Razv IH, Denstedt JD, Nott L, Pearle M, Cauda F, Bolton D, Celia A, de la Rosette J, Group CPS (2012) The CROES percutaneous nephrolithotomy global study: the influence of body mass index on outcome. J Urol 188:138–144CrossRefPubMed
35.
Perez Castro E, Osther PJ, Jinga V, Razvi H, Stravodimos KG, Parikh K, Kural AR, de la Rosette JJ (2014) CROES Ureteroscopy Global Study Group. Differences in ureteroscopic stone treatment and outcomes for distal, mid-, proximal, or multiple ureteral locations: the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society ureteroscopy global study. Eur Urol 66:102–109CrossRefPubMed
36.
Stewart GD, Bariol SV, Moussa SA, Smith G, Tolley DA (2007) Matched pair analysis of ureteroscopy vs. shock wave lithotripsy for the treatment of upper ureteric calculi. Int J Clin Pract 61:784–788CrossRefPubMed
37.
Koo V, Young M, Thompson T, Duggan B (2011) Cost-effectiveness and efficiency of shockwave lithotripsy vs flexible ureteroscopic holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser lithotripsy in the treatment of lower pole renal calculi. BJU Int 108:1913–1916CrossRefPubMed
38.
Hendrikx AJ, Strijbos WE, de Knijff DW, Kums JJ, Doesburg WH, Lemmens WA (1999) Treatment for extended-mid and distal ureteral stones: SWL or ureteroscopy? Results of a multicenter study. J Endourol 13:727–733CrossRefPubMed
39.
Honeck P, Häcker A, Alken P, Michel MS, Knoll T (2006) Shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy for distal ureteral calculi: a prospective study. Urol Res 34:190–192CrossRefPubMed
40.
Karlsen SJ, Renkel J, Tahir AR, Angelsen A, Diep LM (2007) Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy for 5- to 10-mm stones in the proximal ureter: Prospective effectiveness patient-preference trial. J Endourol 21:28–33CrossRefPubMed
41.
Salem HA (2009) Prospective randomized study comparing shock wave lithotripsy and semirigid ureteroscopy for the management of proximal ureteral calculi. Urology 74:1216–1221CrossRefPubMed
42.
Youssef RF, El-Nahas AR, El-Assmy AM, El-Tabey NA, El-Hefnawy AS, Eraky I, El-Kenawy MR, El-Kappany HA, Sheir KZ (2009) Shock wave lithotripsy versus semirigid ureteroscopy for proximal ureteral calculi (<20 mm): a comparative matched-pair study. Urology 73:1184–1187CrossRefPubMed
43.
Albala D, Assimos DG, Clayman RV, Denstedt JD, Grasso M, Gutierrez-Aceves J, Kahn RI, Leveillee RJ, Newman RC, Pearle MS, Preminger GM, Teichman J, Woods JR (2001) Lower pole I: a prospective randomized trial of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrostolithotomy for lower pole nephrolithiasis—initial results. J Urol 166:2072–2080CrossRefPubMed
44.
Egilmez T, Tekin MI, Gonen M, Kilinc F, Goren R, Ozkardes H (2007) Efficacy and safety of a new-generation shockwave lithotripsy machine in the treatment of single renal or ureteral stones: experience with 2670 patients. J Endourol 21:23–27CrossRefPubMed
45.
Seitz C, Martini T, Berner L, Signorello D, Galantini A, Pycha A (2008) Efficacy and treatment outcome of a new electromagnetic lithotripter for upper urinary tract calculi. J Endourol 22:2519–2525CrossRefPubMed
46.
Hochreiter WW, Danuser H, Perrig M, Studer UE (2003) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for distal ureteral calculi: what a powerful machine can achieve. J Urol 169:878–880
47.
Park J, Shin DW, Chung JH, Lee SW (2013) Shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy for ureteral calculi: a prospective assessment of patient-reported outcomes. World J Urol 31:1569–1574CrossRefPubMed
48.
Sener NC, Bas O, Sener E, Zengin K, Ozturk U, Altunkol A, Evliyaoglu Y (2015) Asymptomatic lower pole small renal stones: shock wave lithotripsy, flexible ureteroscopy, or observation? A prospective randomized trial. Urology 85:33–37CrossRefPubMed
49.
Pearle MS, Lingeman JE, Leveillee R, Kuo R, Preminger GM, Nadler RB, Macaluso J, Monga M, Kumar U, Dushinski J, Albala DM, Wolf JSJ, Assimo SD, Fabrizio M, Munch LC, Nakada SY, Auge B, Honey J, Ogan K, Pattaras J, McDougal LEM, Averch TD, Turk T, Pietrow P, Watkins S (2005) Prospective, randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi 1 cm or less. J Urol 173:2005–2009CrossRefPubMed
50.
Jagtap J, Mishra S, Bhattu A, Ganpule A, Sabnis R, Desai M (2014) Evolution of shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) technique: a 25-year single centre experience of >5000 patients. BJU Int 114:748–753CrossRefPubMed
51.
Neisius AWJ, Thomas C, Roos FC, Brenner W, Hampel C, Preminger GM, Thüroff JW, Gillitzer R (2013) Treatment efficacy and outcomes using a third generation shockwave lithotripter. BJU Int 112:972–981PubMed
52.
Matlaga BR, American Board of Urology (2009) Contemporary surgical management of upper urinary tract calculi. J Urol 181:2152–2156CrossRefPubMed
53.
Kim TB, Lee SC, Kim KH, Jung H, Yoon SJ, Oh JK (2013) The feasibility of shockwave lithotripsy for treating solitary, lower calyceal stones over 1 cm in size. Can Urol Assoc J 7:E156–E160PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
54.
Carlsson P, Kinn AC, Tiselius H-G, Ohlsén H, Rahmqvist M (1992) Cost effectiveness of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for medium-sized kidney stones. A randomised clinical trial. Scand J Urol Nephrol 26:257–263CrossRefPubMed
55.
56.
Kumar A, Nanda B, Kumar N, Kumar R, Vasudeva P, Mohanty NK (2015) A prospective randomized comparison between shockwave lithotripsy and semirigid ureteroscopy for upper ureteral stones <2 cm: a single center experience. J Endourol 29:47–51CrossRefPubMed
57.
Singh BP, Prakash J, Sankhwar SN, Dhakad U, Sankhwar PL, Goel A, Kumar M (2014) Retrograde intrarenal surgery vs extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for intermediate size inferior pole calculi: a prospective assessment of objective and subjective outcomes. Urology 83:1016–1022CrossRefPubMed
58.
Manzoor S, Hashmi AH, Sohail MA, Mahar F, Bhatti S, Khuhro AQ (2013) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) vs. ureterorenoscopic (URS) manipulation in proximal ureteric stone. J Coll Phys Surg Pak 23:726–730
59.
Pardalidis NP, Kosmaoglou EV, Kapotis CG (1999) Endoscopy vs. extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy in the treatment of distal ureteral stones: ten years’ experience. J Endourol 133:161–164CrossRef
60.
Eden CG, Mark IR, Gupta RR, Eastman J, Shrotri NC, Tiptaft RC (1998) Intracorporeal or extracorporeal lithotripsy for distal ureteral calculi? Effect of stone size and multiplicity on success rates. J Endourol 12:307–312CrossRefPubMed
61.
Wiesenthal JD, Ghiculete D, D’A Honey RJ, Pace KT (2011) A comparison of treatment modalities for renal calculi between 100 and 300 mm2: are shockwave lithotripsy, ureteroscopy, and percutaneous nephrolithotomy equivalent? J Endourol. 25:481–485CrossRefPubMed
62.
Murota-Kawano A, Ohya K, Sekine H (2008) Outpatient basis extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for ureter stones: efficacy of the third generation lithotripter as the first line treatment. Int J Urol 15:210–2156CrossRefPubMed
63.
Razvi H, Fuller A, Nott L, Méndez-Probst CE, Leistner R, Foell K, Davé S, Denstedt JD (2012) Risk factors for perinephric hematoma formation after shockwave lithotripsy: a matched case–control analysis. J Endourol 26:1478–1482CrossRefPubMed
64.
Lee HY, Yang YH, Shen JT, Jang MY, Shih PM, Wu WJ, Huang CH, Chou YH, Juan YS (2013) Risk factors survey for extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy-induced renal hematoma. J Endourol 27:763–767CrossRefPubMed
65.
Chew BH, Zavaglia B, Sutton C, Masson RK, Chan SH, Hamidizadeh R, Lee JK, Arsovska O, Rowley VA, Zwirewich C, Afshar K, Paterson RF (2013) Twenty-year prevalence of diabetes mellitus and hypertension in patients receiving shock-wave lithotripsy for urolithiasis. BJU Int 109:444–449CrossRef
66.
Argyropoulos AN, Tolley DA (2010) Evaluation of outcome following lithotripsy. Curr Opin Urol 20:154–158CrossRefPubMed
67.
68.
Evan AP, Coe FL, Connors BA, Handa RK, Lingeman JE, Worcester EM (2015) Mechanism by which shock wave lithotripsy can promote formation of human calcium phosphate stones. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 308:F938–F949CrossRefPubMed
69.
Wood KD, Stanasel IS, Koslov DS, Mufarrij PW, McLorie GA, Assimos DG (2013) Changing stone composition profile of children with nephrolithiasis. Urology 82:210–213CrossRefPubMed
70.
Mandel N, Mandel I, Fryjo VK, Rejniak T, Mandel G (2003) Conversion of calcium oxalate to calcium phosphate with recurrent stone episodes. J Urol 169:2026–2029CrossRefPubMed
71.
Fink HA, Akornor JW, Garimella PS, MacDonald R, Cutting A, Rutks IR, Monga M, Wilt T (2009) Diet, fluid, or supplements for secondary prevention of nephrolithiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Eur Urol 56:72–80PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
72.
Fink HA, Wilt TJ, Eidman KE, Garimella PS, MacDonald R, Rutks IR, Brasure M, Kane RL, Ouellette J, Monga M (2013) Medical management to prevent recurrent nephrolithiasis in adults: a systematic review for an American College of Physicians Clinical Guideline. Ann Intern Med 158:535–543CrossRefPubMed
73.
Tailly GG, Marcelo JB, Schneider IA, Byttebier G, Daems K (2001) Patient-controlled analgesia during SWL treatments. J Endourol 15:465–471CrossRefPubMed
74.
Lehtoranta K (1995) Cost and effectiveness of different treatment alternatives in urinary stone practice. Scand J Urol Nephrol 29:437–447CrossRefPubMed
75.
Posch-Zimmermann R et al (2011) Extracorporal shockwave lithotripsy and endoscopic stone treatment procedures: economic considerations. Eur Urol 10:508–509 (abstract E161 eULIS congress)
76.
Bohris C, Roosen A, Dickmann M, Hocaoglu Y, Sandner S, Bader M, Stief CG, Walther S (2012) Monitoring the coupling of the lithotripter therapy head with skin during routine shock wave lithotripsy with a surveillance camera. J Urol 187:157–163CrossRefPubMed
77.
Tailly GG, Tailly-Cusse MM (2014) Optical coupling control: an important step toward better shockwave lithotripsy. J Endourol 28:1368–1373CrossRefPubMed
78.
79.
Okada A, Yasui T, Taqushi K, Niimi K, Hirose Y, Hamamoto S, Ando R, Kubota Y, Umemoto Y, Tozawa K, Sasaki S, Hayashi Y, Kohri K (2013) Impact of official technical training for urologists on the efficacy of shock wave lithotripsy. Urolithiasis 41:487–492CrossRefPubMed
80.
Lee C, Best SL, Ugarte R, Monga M (2008) Impact of learning curve on efficacy of shock wave lithotripsy. Radiol Technol 80:20–24PubMed
81.
Tiselius H, Ringdén I (2007) Stone treatment index: a mathematical summary of the procedure for removal of stones from the urinary tract. J Endourol 21:1261–1269CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Arguments for choosing extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for removal of urinary tract stones
Authors
Hans-Göran Tiselius
Christian G. Chaussy
Publication date
01-10-2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Urolithiasis / Issue 5/2015
Print ISSN: 2194-7228
Electronic ISSN: 2194-7236
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-015-0818-9

Other articles of this Issue 5/2015

Urolithiasis 5/2015 Go to the issue

Original Paper

High frequency of SLC22A12 variants causing renal hypouricemia 1 in the Czech and Slovak Roma population; simple and rapid detection method by allele-specific polymerase chain reaction

Original Paper

The efficacy and safety of percutaneous nephrolithotomy under general versus regional anesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Letter to the Editor

Fluoroless ureteroscopy: in whom and when?

Original Paper

Antilithic effects of extracts from different polarity fractions of Desmodium styracifolium on experimentally induced urolithiasis in rats

Original Paper

Mutation analysis of SLC3A1 and SLC7A9 genes in patients with cystinuria

Original Paper

The low levels of circulating hepatocyte growth factor in nephrolithiasis cases: independent from gene polymorphism