Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Urolithiasis 1/2015

01-02-2015 | Original Paper

Ureteral wall thickness at the impacted ureteral stone site: a critical predictor for success rates after SWL

Authors: Kemal Sarica, Alper Kafkasli, Özgür Yazici, Ali Cihangir Çetinel, Mehmet Kutlu Demirkol, Murat Tuncer, Cahit Şahin, Bilal Eryildirim

Published in: Urolithiasis | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

The aim of the study was to determine the possible predictive value of certain patient- and stone-related factors on the stone-free rates and auxiliary procedures after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in patients with impacted proximal ureteral calculi. A total of 111 patients (86 male, 25 females M/F: 3.44/1) with impacted proximal ureteral stones treated with shock wave lithotripsy were evaluated. Cases were retrieved from a departmental shock wave lithotripsy database. Variables analyzed included BMI of the case, diameter of proximal ureter and renal pelvis, stone size and Hounsfield unit, ureteral wall thickness at the impacted stone site. Stone-free status on follow-up imaging at 3 months was considered a successful outcome. All patients had a single impacted proximal ureteral stone. While the mean age of the cases was 46 ± 13 years (range 26–79 years), mean stone size was 8.95 mm (5.3–15.1 mm). Following shock wave lithotripsy although 87 patients (78.4 %) were completely stone-free at 3-month follow-up visit, 24 (21.6 %) cases had residual fragments requiring further repeat procedures. Prediction of the final outcome of SWL in patients with impacted proximal ureteral stones is a challenging issue and our data did clearly indicate a highly significant relationship between ureteral wall thickness and the success rates of shock wave lithotripsy particularly in cases requiring additional procedures. Of all the evaluated stone- and patient-related factors, only ureteral wall thickness at the impacted stone site independently predicted shock wave lithotripsy success.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Mugiya S, Ito T, Maruyama S, Hadano S, Nagae H (2004) Endoscopic features of impacted ureteral stones. J Urol 171:89–91PubMedCrossRef Mugiya S, Ito T, Maruyama S, Hadano S, Nagae H (2004) Endoscopic features of impacted ureteral stones. J Urol 171:89–91PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Deliveliotis C, Chrisofos M, Albanis S, Serafetinides E, Varkarakis J, Protogerou V (2003) Management and follow-up of impacted ureteral stones. Urol Int 70:269–272PubMedCrossRef Deliveliotis C, Chrisofos M, Albanis S, Serafetinides E, Varkarakis J, Protogerou V (2003) Management and follow-up of impacted ureteral stones. Urol Int 70:269–272PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Morgentaler A, Bridge SS, Dretler SP (1990) Management of the impacted ureteral calculus. J Urol 143:263–266PubMed Morgentaler A, Bridge SS, Dretler SP (1990) Management of the impacted ureteral calculus. J Urol 143:263–266PubMed
4.
go back to reference Binbay M, Tepeler A, Singh A, Akman T, Tekinaslan E, Sarilar O et al (2011) Evaluation of pneumatic versus holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy for impacted ureteral stones. Int Urol Nephrol 43:989–995PubMedCrossRef Binbay M, Tepeler A, Singh A, Akman T, Tekinaslan E, Sarilar O et al (2011) Evaluation of pneumatic versus holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy for impacted ureteral stones. Int Urol Nephrol 43:989–995PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Wolf JS Jr (2007) Treatment selection and outcomes: Ureteral calculi. Urol Clin North Am 34:421–430PubMedCrossRef Wolf JS Jr (2007) Treatment selection and outcomes: Ureteral calculi. Urol Clin North Am 34:421–430PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Segura JW, Preminger GM, Assimos DG et al (1997) Ureteral stones clinical guidelines panel summary report on the management of ureteral calculi. Am Urol Assoc J Urol 158:1915–1921 Segura JW, Preminger GM, Assimos DG et al (1997) Ureteral stones clinical guidelines panel summary report on the management of ureteral calculi. Am Urol Assoc J Urol 158:1915–1921
7.
go back to reference Preminger GM, Tiselius HG, Assimos DG, Alken P, Buck AC, Gallucci M et al (2007) 2007 Guideline for the management of ureteral calculi. Eur Urol 52:1610–1631PubMedCrossRef Preminger GM, Tiselius HG, Assimos DG, Alken P, Buck AC, Gallucci M et al (2007) 2007 Guideline for the management of ureteral calculi. Eur Urol 52:1610–1631PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Skrepetis K, Doumas K, Siafakas I, Lykourinas M (2001) Laparoscopic versus open ureterolithotomy. A comparative study. Eur Urol 40:32–36PubMedCrossRef Skrepetis K, Doumas K, Siafakas I, Lykourinas M (2001) Laparoscopic versus open ureterolithotomy. A comparative study. Eur Urol 40:32–36PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Turk C, Knoll T, Petrik A et al (2014) Guidelines on urolithiasis. European Association of Urology, Arnhem Turk C, Knoll T, Petrik A et al (2014) Guidelines on urolithiasis. European Association of Urology, Arnhem
10.
go back to reference Ghoneim IA, El-Ghoneimy MN, El-Naggar AE, Hammoud KM, El-Gammal MY, Morsi AA (2010) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in impacted upper ureteral stones: a prospective randomized comparison between stented and non-stented techniques. Urology 75:45–50PubMedCrossRef Ghoneim IA, El-Ghoneimy MN, El-Naggar AE, Hammoud KM, El-Gammal MY, Morsi AA (2010) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in impacted upper ureteral stones: a prospective randomized comparison between stented and non-stented techniques. Urology 75:45–50PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Lopes Neto AC, Korkes F, Silva JL 2nd, Amarante RD, Mattos MH, Tobias-Machado M et al (2012) Prospective randomized study of treatment of large proximal ureteral stones: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus ureterolithotripsy versus laparoscopy. J Urol 187:164–168PubMedCrossRef Lopes Neto AC, Korkes F, Silva JL 2nd, Amarante RD, Mattos MH, Tobias-Machado M et al (2012) Prospective randomized study of treatment of large proximal ureteral stones: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus ureterolithotripsy versus laparoscopy. J Urol 187:164–168PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Wu CF, Shee JJ, Lin WY, Lin CL, Chen CS (2004) Comparison between extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and semirigid ureterorenoscope with holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy for treating large proximal ureteral stones. J Urol 172(5 Pt 1):1899–1902PubMedCrossRef Wu CF, Shee JJ, Lin WY, Lin CL, Chen CS (2004) Comparison between extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and semirigid ureterorenoscope with holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy for treating large proximal ureteral stones. J Urol 172(5 Pt 1):1899–1902PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Dretler SP, Keating MA, Riley J (1986) An algorithm for the management of ureteral calculi. J Urol 136:1190–1193PubMed Dretler SP, Keating MA, Riley J (1986) An algorithm for the management of ureteral calculi. J Urol 136:1190–1193PubMed
14.
go back to reference Mueller SC, Wilbert D, Thueroff JW, Alken P (1986) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of ureteral stones: clinical experience and experimental findings. J Urol 135:831–834PubMed Mueller SC, Wilbert D, Thueroff JW, Alken P (1986) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of ureteral stones: clinical experience and experimental findings. J Urol 135:831–834PubMed
15.
go back to reference Chaussy CG, Fuchs GJ (1989) Current state and future developments of noninvasive treatment of human urinary stones with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 141:782–789PubMed Chaussy CG, Fuchs GJ (1989) Current state and future developments of noninvasive treatment of human urinary stones with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 141:782–789PubMed
16.
17.
go back to reference ElGanainy E, Hameed DA, Elgammal MA, Abd-Elsayed AA, Shalaby M (2009) Experience with impacted upper ureteral Stones; should we abandon using semirigid ureteroscopes and pneumatic lithoclast? Int Arch Med 2:13PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef ElGanainy E, Hameed DA, Elgammal MA, Abd-Elsayed AA, Shalaby M (2009) Experience with impacted upper ureteral Stones; should we abandon using semirigid ureteroscopes and pneumatic lithoclast? Int Arch Med 2:13PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Sun X, Xia S, Lu J, Liu H, Han B, Li W (2008) Treatment of large impacted proximal ureteral stones: randomized comparison of percutaneous antegrade ureterolithotripsy versus retrograde ureterolithotripsy. J Endourol 22:913–917PubMedCrossRef Sun X, Xia S, Lu J, Liu H, Han B, Li W (2008) Treatment of large impacted proximal ureteral stones: randomized comparison of percutaneous antegrade ureterolithotripsy versus retrograde ureterolithotripsy. J Endourol 22:913–917PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Juan YS, Shen JT, Li CC, Wang CJ, Chuang SM, Huang CH et al (2008) Comparison of percutaneous nephrolithotomy and ureteroscopic lithotripsy in the management of impacted, large, proximal ureteral stones. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 24:204–209PubMedCrossRef Juan YS, Shen JT, Li CC, Wang CJ, Chuang SM, Huang CH et al (2008) Comparison of percutaneous nephrolithotomy and ureteroscopic lithotripsy in the management of impacted, large, proximal ureteral stones. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 24:204–209PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Manohar T, Ganpule A, Desai M (2008) Comparative evaluation of Swiss Litho Clast 2 and holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy for impacted upper-ureteral stones. J Endourol 22:443–446PubMedCrossRef Manohar T, Ganpule A, Desai M (2008) Comparative evaluation of Swiss Litho Clast 2 and holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy for impacted upper-ureteral stones. J Endourol 22:443–446PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Mugiya S, Ozono S, Nagata M, Takayama T, Nagae H (2006) Retrograde endoscopic management of ureteral stones more than 2 cm in size. Urology 67:1164–1168PubMedCrossRef Mugiya S, Ozono S, Nagata M, Takayama T, Nagae H (2006) Retrograde endoscopic management of ureteral stones more than 2 cm in size. Urology 67:1164–1168PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Yagisawa T, Kobayashi C, Ishikawa N, Kobayashi H, Toma H (2001) Benefits of ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy for the treatment of impacted ureteral stones. J Endourol 15:697–699PubMedCrossRef Yagisawa T, Kobayashi C, Ishikawa N, Kobayashi H, Toma H (2001) Benefits of ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy for the treatment of impacted ureteral stones. J Endourol 15:697–699PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference 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 21:28–33PubMedCrossRef 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 21:28–33PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Ziaee SA, Halimiasl P, Aminsharifi A, Shafi H, Beigi FM, Basiri A (2008) Management of 10–15 mm proximal ureteral stones: ureteroscopy or extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy? Urology 71:28–31PubMedCrossRef Ziaee SA, Halimiasl P, Aminsharifi A, Shafi H, Beigi FM, Basiri A (2008) Management of 10–15 mm proximal ureteral stones: ureteroscopy or extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy? Urology 71:28–31PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Singh I, Gupta NP, Hemal AK et al (2001) Efficacy and outcome of surgical intervention in patients with nephrolithiasis and chronic renal failure. Int Urol Nephrol 33:293–298PubMedCrossRef Singh I, Gupta NP, Hemal AK et al (2001) Efficacy and outcome of surgical intervention in patients with nephrolithiasis and chronic renal failure. Int Urol Nephrol 33:293–298PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Liong ML, Clayman RV, Gittes RF et al (1989) Treatment options for proximal ureteral urolithiasis: review and recommendations. J Urol 141:504–509PubMed Liong ML, Clayman RV, Gittes RF et al (1989) Treatment options for proximal ureteral urolithiasis: review and recommendations. J Urol 141:504–509PubMed
27.
go back to reference Lee YH, Tsai JY, Jiaan BP, Wu T, Yu CC (2006) Prospective randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopic lithotripsy for management of large upper third ureteral stones. Urology 67(3):480–484 (discussion 484)PubMedCrossRef Lee YH, Tsai JY, Jiaan BP, Wu T, Yu CC (2006) Prospective randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopic lithotripsy for management of large upper third ureteral stones. Urology 67(3):480–484 (discussion 484)PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Yu W, Cheng F, Zhang X, Yang S, Ruan Y, Xia Y et al (2010) Retrogradeureteroscopic treatment for upper ureteral stones: a 5-year retrospective study. J Endourol 24:1753–1757PubMedCrossRef Yu W, Cheng F, Zhang X, Yang S, Ruan Y, Xia Y et al (2010) Retrogradeureteroscopic treatment for upper ureteral stones: a 5-year retrospective study. J Endourol 24:1753–1757PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Fong YK, Ho SH, Peh OH, Ng FC, Lim PH, Quek PL et al (2004) Extracorporea shockwave lithotripsy and intracorporeal lithotripsy for proximal ureteric calculi—a comparative assessment of efficacy and safety. Ann Acad Med Singap 33:80–83PubMed Fong YK, Ho SH, Peh OH, Ng FC, Lim PH, Quek PL et al (2004) Extracorporea shockwave lithotripsy and intracorporeal lithotripsy for proximal ureteric calculi—a comparative assessment of efficacy and safety. Ann Acad Med Singap 33:80–83PubMed
Metadata
Title
Ureteral wall thickness at the impacted ureteral stone site: a critical predictor for success rates after SWL
Authors
Kemal Sarica
Alper Kafkasli
Özgür Yazici
Ali Cihangir Çetinel
Mehmet Kutlu Demirkol
Murat Tuncer
Cahit Şahin
Bilal Eryildirim
Publication date
01-02-2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Urolithiasis / Issue 1/2015
Print ISSN: 2194-7228
Electronic ISSN: 2194-7236
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-014-0724-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Urolithiasis 1/2015 Go to the issue