Top

World Journal of Urology

Published in:

01-12-2013 | Original Article

Treatment of large impacted proximal ureteral stones: randomized comparison of minimally invasive percutaneous antegrade ureterolithotripsy versus retrograde ureterolithotripsy

Authors: Gu Xiao-jian, Lu Jian Lin, Xu Yan

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 6/2013

Abstract

Objective

To provide appropriate evidence for treatment planning of patients with an impacted proximal ureteral stones ≥1.5 cm in size, by analyzing the therapeutic outcomes for those undergoing minimally invasive percutaneous antegrade ureterolithotripsy and retrograde ureterolithotripsy.

Patients and methods

From September 2010 to November 2011, eligible patients with impacted proximal ureteral stones ≥1.5 cm in size referred to our institute were considered for this study. The closed envelope method was used to randomize the enrolled patients to mini-PCNL (30) or retrograde ureterolithotripsy (29). The efficiency quotient (EQ) was calculated to specifically address the efficiency for both the techniques. All preoperative and postoperative data for both groups were recorded.

Results

The initial stone-free rate was 93.3 % in the mini-PCNL group and 41.4 % in the URSL group (p < 0.001). However, the overall stone-free rate at the 1-month follow-up visit after initial treatment was 100 % in the mini-PCNL group and 89.7 % in the URSL group (p = 0.07). The EQs for the mini-PCNL and URSL groups were 0.83 and 0.50, respectively.

Conclusions

Our study shows that mini-PCNL removal of large impacted proximal ureteral calculi can achieve higher stone-free rates and safe.

Scarpa RM, DeLisa A, Porru D, Usai E (1999) Holmium:YAG laser ureterolithotripsy. Eur Urol 35:233PubMedCrossRef

Dretler SP (2006) Prevention of retrograde stone migration during ureteroscopy. Nat Clin Pract Urol 3:60–61PubMedCrossRef

Salem HK (2009) A prospective randomized study comparing shock wave lithotripsy and semirigid ureteroscopy for the management of upper ureteral calculi. Urology 74:1216–1221PubMedCrossRef

Preminger GM, Tiselius H, Assimos DG et al (2007) 2007 guideline for the management of ureteral calculi. Eur Urol 52:1610–1631PubMedCrossRef

Lam JS, Greene TD, Gupta M (2002) Treatment of proximal ureteral calculi: holmium:YAG laser ureterolithotripsy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 167:1972–1976PubMedCrossRef

Preminger GM, Tiselius HG, Assimos DG et al (2007) 2007 guideline for the management of ureteral calculi. J Urol 178:2418–2434PubMedCrossRef

Araki M, Wong C (2007) Direct comparison of fiberoptic and digital ureteroscopy for upper urinary tract lithotripsy. J Urol 4(suppl):V1826

Nahas AR, Eraky I, el-Assmy AM et al (2006) Percutaneous treatment of large upper tract stones after urinary diversion. Urology 68:500–504PubMedCrossRef

Li X, He Z, Wu K et al (2009) Chinese minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy: the Guangzhou experience. J Endourol 23:1693–1697PubMedCrossRef

10.

Seitz C, Tanovic E, Kikic Z, Fajkovic H (2007) Impact of stone size, location, composition, impaction, and hydronephrosis on the efficacy of holmium:YAG-laser ureterolithotripsy. Eur Urol 52:1751–1759PubMedCrossRef

11.

Sofer M, Watterson JD, Wollin TA, Nott L, Razvi H, Denstedt JD (2002) Holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy for upper urinary tract calculi in 598 patients. J Urol 167:31–34PubMedCrossRef

12.

Kijvikai K, Haleblian GE, Preminger GM et al (2007) Shock wave lithotripsy or ureteroscopy for the management of proximal ureteral calculi: an old discussion revisited. J Urol 178:1157–1163PubMedCrossRef

13.

Pierre S, Preminger GM (2007) Holmium laser for stone management. World J Urol 25:235–239PubMedCrossRef

14.

Jiang H, Wu Z, Ding Q, Zhang Y (2007) Ureteroscopic treatment of ureteral calculi with holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy. J Endourol 21:151–154PubMedCrossRef

15.

Leijte JA, Oddens JR, Lock TM (2008) Holmium laser lithotripsy for ureteral calculi: predictive factors for complications and success. J Endourol 22:257–260PubMedCrossRef

16.

Eisner BH, Dretler SP (2009) Use of the Stone Cone for prevention of calculus retropulsion during holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy: case series and review of the literature. Urol Int 82:356–360PubMedCrossRef

17.

Johnson GB, Portela D, Grasso M (2006) Advanced ureteroscopy: wireless and sheathless. J Endourol 20:552–555PubMedCrossRef

18.

Goel R, Aron M, Kesarwani PK et al (2005) Percutaneous antegrade removal of impacted upper-ureteral calculi: still the treatment of choice in developing countries. J Endourol 19:54–57PubMedCrossRef

19.

Li LY, Gao X, Yang M et al (2010) Does a smaller tract in percutaneous nephrolithotomy contribute to less invasiveness? A prospective comparative study. Urology 75:56–61PubMedCrossRef

20.

Jackman SV, Docimo SG, Cadeddu JA et al (1998) The “mini-perc” technique: a less invasive alternative to percutaneous nephrolithotomy. World J Urol 16:371–374PubMedCrossRef

21.

Fu YM, Chen QY, Zhao ZS et al (2011) Ultrasound-guided minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy in flank position for management of complex renal calculi. Urology 77:40–44

22.

Sun X, Xia S, Lu J et al (2008) Treatment of large impacted proximal ureteral stones: randomized comparison of percutaneous antegrade ureterolithotripsy versus retrograde ureterolithotripsy. J Endourol 22:913–917PubMedCrossRef

23.

Lahme S, Bichler KH, Strohmaier WL et al (2001) Minimally invasive PCNL in patients with renal pelvic and calyceal stones. Eur Urol 40:619–624PubMedCrossRef

24.

Wu CF, Shee JJ, Lin WY et al (2004) Comparison between extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and semirigid ureterorenoscope with holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy for treating large proximal ureteral stones. J Urol 172:1899–1902PubMedCrossRef

25.

Lee YH, Tsai JY, Jiaan BP et al (2006) Prospective randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopic lithotripsy for management of large upper third ureteral stones. Urology 67:480–484PubMedCrossRef

26.

Pardalidis NP, Papatsoris AG, Kapotis CG, Kosmaoglou EV (2006) Treatment of impacted lower third ureteral stones with the use of the ureteral access sheath. Urol Res 34:211–214PubMedCrossRef

27.

Matlaga BR, Jansen JP, Meckley LM (2012) et al.Treatment of ureteral and renal stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. J Urol 188(1):130–137PubMedCrossRef

28.

Bostanci Y, Ozden E, Atac F et al (2012) The double wire technique: an alternative method for difficult ureteroscopic access. Urol Res 40:783–784

29.

Khairy-Salem H, el-Ghoneimy M et al (2011) Semirigid ureteroscopy in management of large proximal ureteral calculi: is there still a role in developing countries? Urology 77(5):1064–1068PubMedCrossRef

Title: Treatment of large impacted proximal ureteral stones: randomized comparison of minimally invasive percutaneous antegrade ureterolithotripsy versus retrograde ureterolithotripsy
Authors: Gu Xiao-jian
Lu Jian Lin
Xu Yan
Publication date: 01-12-2013
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: World Journal of Urology / Issue 6/2013
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-013-1026-2

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Treatment of large impacted proximal ureteral stones: randomized comparison of minimally invasive percutaneous antegrade ureterolithotripsy versus retrograde ureterolithotripsy

Abstract

Objective

Patients and methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Patients and methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 6/2013

Impact of intermittent catheterization on the quality of life of multiple sclerosis patients

Efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in patients undergoing cystoscopy: a randomized clinical trial

Unfavorable outcomes of laparoscopic pyeloplasty using barbed sutures: a multi-center experience

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy under combined sonographic/radiologic guided puncture: results of a learning curve using the modified Clavien grading system

Atherosclerosis within the non-neoplastic margin of partial nephrectomy specimens: implications for medical management

Semen quality and associated reproductive indicators in middle-aged males: the role of non-malignant prostate conditions and genital tract inflammation