Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Urology and Nephrology 2/2008

01-06-2008 | Original Article

Does stone dimension affect the effectiveness of ureteroscopic lithotripsy in distal ureteral stones?

Authors: Volkan Tuğcu, Ali İhsan Taşcı, Emin Özbek, Bekir Aras, Levent Verim, Levent Gürkan

Published in: International Urology and Nephrology | Issue 2/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

To investigate whether stone dimension is a restrictive factor for ureterorenoscopic procedures.

Materials and methods

A group of 416 patients who had undergone ureterorenoscopic pneumatic lithotripsy (URS-PL) for lower ureteral stones between January 1999 and June 2006 in our clinic had been evaluated retrospectively. Two hundred and seventy (270, 64.9%) patients were men and 146 (35.1%) were women. The mean age of the patients was 36.61 (±12.43) years. Patients were grouped according to stone dimension; 193 patients with stones smaller than 1 cm being group 1 and 223 patients with stones ≥1 cm in dimension being group 2. Stone-free rate, operative time and rate of complications of the groups were compared. Pearson’s correlation test, χ2 test, Fischer’s exact test and Student’s t-test were used for the statistical analysis. The p value was accepted as being meaningful if p < 0.05.

Results

For group 1, the mean operative time was 39.19 (±18.33) min. Proximal stone migration in five and false passage formation in three patients was observed. Three patients were stone-free after a second session of URS-PL. The cumulative stone-free rate was 97.4% (188/193). For group 2, the mean operative time was 48.5 (±11.31) min. About 208 (93.27%) patients were stone-free after the first session and an additional eight patients became stone-free after the second session of URS-PL. False passage, ureteral perforation, ureteral avulsion and stricture were observed in four, six, one and one patients, respectively. No proximal stone migration was observed. The cumulative stone-free rate was 96.86% (216/223).

Conclusions

The effectiveness of ureterorenoscopy (URS) in the treatment of distal ureteral stones was independent of stone dimension. However, the operative time was longer and the rate of perforation was higher in stones with a diameter ≥1 cm. On the other hand, the migration rate was higher in stones <1 cm in diameter. Generally speaking, there was no meaningful effect of stone dimension on complication rates.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Miller K, Bubeck JR, Hautmann R (1986) Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy of distal ureteral calculi. Eur Urol 12(5):305–307PubMed Miller K, Bubeck JR, Hautmann R (1986) Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy of distal ureteral calculi. Eur Urol 12(5):305–307PubMed
3.
go back to reference Blute ML, Segura JW, Patterson DE (1988) Ureteroscopy. J Urol 139(3):510–512PubMed Blute ML, Segura JW, Patterson DE (1988) Ureteroscopy. J Urol 139(3):510–512PubMed
4.
go back to reference Lingeman JE, Sonda LP, Kahnoski RJ et al (1986) Ureteral stone management: emerging concepts. J Urol 135(6):1172–1174PubMed Lingeman JE, Sonda LP, Kahnoski RJ et al (1986) Ureteral stone management: emerging concepts. J Urol 135(6):1172–1174PubMed
5.
go back to reference Green DF, Lytton B (1985) Early experience with direct vision electrohydraulic lithotripsy of ureteral calculi. J Urol 133(5):767–770PubMed Green DF, Lytton B (1985) Early experience with direct vision electrohydraulic lithotripsy of ureteral calculi. J Urol 133(5):767–770PubMed
6.
go back to reference Papadoukakis S, Stolzenburg J-U, Truss MC (2006) Treatment strategies of ureteral stones. Eur Urol EAU–EBU Update Ser 4:184–190 Papadoukakis S, Stolzenburg J-U, Truss MC (2006) Treatment strategies of ureteral stones. Eur Urol EAU–EBU Update Ser 4:184–190
7.
go back to reference Küpeli B, Biri H, Isen K et al (1998) Treatment of ureteral stones: comparison of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and endourologic alternatives. Eur Urol 34(6):474–479PubMedCrossRef Küpeli B, Biri H, Isen K et al (1998) Treatment of ureteral stones: comparison of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and endourologic alternatives. Eur Urol 34(6):474–479PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Turk TMT, Jenkins AD, Bagley DH (1999) A comparison of ureteroscopy to in situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for the treatment of distal ureteral calculi. J Urol 161(1):45–47PubMedCrossRef Turk TMT, Jenkins AD, Bagley DH (1999) A comparison of ureteroscopy to in situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for the treatment of distal ureteral calculi. J Urol 161(1):45–47PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Eden CG, Mark IR, Gupta RR et al (1998) Intracorporeal or extracorporeal lithotripsy for distal ureteral calculi? Effect of stone size and multiplicity on success rates. J Endourol 12(4):307–312PubMed Eden CG, Mark IR, Gupta RR et al (1998) Intracorporeal or extracorporeal lithotripsy for distal ureteral calculi? Effect of stone size and multiplicity on success rates. J Endourol 12(4):307–312PubMed
10.
go back to reference Anderson KR, Keetch DW, Albala DM et al (1994) Optimal therapy for the distal ureteral stone: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy. J Urol 152(1):62–65PubMed Anderson KR, Keetch DW, Albala DM et al (1994) Optimal therapy for the distal ureteral stone: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy. J Urol 152(1):62–65PubMed
11.
go back to reference Park H, Park M, Park T (1998) Two-year experience with ureteral stones: extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopic manipulation. J Endourol 12(6):501–504PubMed Park H, Park M, Park T (1998) Two-year experience with ureteral stones: extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopic manipulation. J Endourol 12(6):501–504PubMed
12.
go back to reference Hautmann S, Friedrich MG, Fernandez S et al (2004) Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy compared with ureteroscopy for the removal of small distal ureteral stones. Urol Int 73(3):238–243PubMedCrossRef Hautmann S, Friedrich MG, Fernandez S et al (2004) Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy compared with ureteroscopy for the removal of small distal ureteral stones. Urol Int 73(3):238–243PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Chang C-P, Huang S-H, Tai H-L et al (2001) Optimal treatment for distal ureteral calculi: extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy. J Endourol 15(6):563–566PubMedCrossRef Chang C-P, Huang S-H, Tai H-L et al (2001) Optimal treatment for distal ureteral calculi: extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy. J Endourol 15(6):563–566PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Pearle MS, Nadler R, Bercowsky E et al (2001) Prospective randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for management of distal ureteral calculi. J Urol 166(4):1255–1260PubMedCrossRef Pearle MS, Nadler R, Bercowsky E et al (2001) Prospective randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for management of distal ureteral calculi. J Urol 166(4):1255–1260PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Sözen S, Küpeli B, Tunç L, Şenocak Ç, Alkibay T (2003) Management of ureteral stones with pneumatic lithotripsy: report of 500 patients. J Endourol 17(9):721–724PubMedCrossRef Sözen S, Küpeli B, Tunç L, Şenocak Ç, Alkibay T (2003) Management of ureteral stones with pneumatic lithotripsy: report of 500 patients. J Endourol 17(9):721–724PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Morgentaler A, Bridge SS, Dretler SP (1990) Management of the impacted ureteral calculus. J Urol 143(2):263–266PubMed Morgentaler A, Bridge SS, Dretler SP (1990) Management of the impacted ureteral calculus. J Urol 143(2):263–266PubMed
17.
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(4):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(4):831–834PubMed
18.
go back to reference Strohmaier WL, Schubert G, Resekranz T, Weigl A (1999) Comparison of extracorpereal shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy in the treatment of ureteral calculi: a prospective study. Eur Urol 36(5):376–379PubMedCrossRef Strohmaier WL, Schubert G, Resekranz T, Weigl A (1999) Comparison of extracorpereal shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy in the treatment of ureteral calculi: a prospective study. Eur Urol 36(5):376–379PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Peschel R, Janetschek G, Bartsch G (1999) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy for distal ureteral calculi: a prospective randomized study. J Urol 162:1909–1912PubMedCrossRef Peschel R, Janetschek G, Bartsch G (1999) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy for distal ureteral calculi: a prospective randomized study. J Urol 162:1909–1912PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Hendirikx AJM, Strijbos WE, de Knijff DW et al (1999) Treatment for extended-mid and distal ureteral stones: SWL or ureteroscopy? Results of a multicenter study. J Endourol 13(10):727–733CrossRef Hendirikx AJM, Strijbos WE, de Knijff DW et al (1999) Treatment for extended-mid and distal ureteral stones: SWL or ureteroscopy? Results of a multicenter study. J Endourol 13(10):727–733CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Andankar MG, Maheshwari PN, Saple AL, Mehta V, Varshney A, Bansal B (2001) Symptomatic small non-obstructing lower ureteric calculi: comparison of ureteroscopy and extra corporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Postgrad Med 47(3):177–180PubMed Andankar MG, Maheshwari PN, Saple AL, Mehta V, Varshney A, Bansal B (2001) Symptomatic small non-obstructing lower ureteric calculi: comparison of ureteroscopy and extra corporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Postgrad Med 47(3):177–180PubMed
22.
go back to reference Zeng G-Q, Zhong W-D, Cai Y-B et al (2002) Extracorporeal shock-wave versus pneumatic ureteroscopic lithotripsy in treatment of lower ureteral calculi. Asian J Androl 4(4):303–305PubMed Zeng G-Q, Zhong W-D, Cai Y-B et al (2002) Extracorporeal shock-wave versus pneumatic ureteroscopic lithotripsy in treatment of lower ureteral calculi. Asian J Androl 4(4):303–305PubMed
23.
go back to reference Hollenbeck BK, Schuster TG, Faerber GJ, Wolf JS Jr (2001) Comparison of outcomes of ureteroscopy for ureteral calculi located above and below the pelvic brim. Urology 58(3):351–356PubMedCrossRef Hollenbeck BK, Schuster TG, Faerber GJ, Wolf JS Jr (2001) Comparison of outcomes of ureteroscopy for ureteral calculi located above and below the pelvic brim. Urology 58(3):351–356PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Martin TV, Sosa RE (1998) Shock wave lithotripsy. In: Walsh PC, Retik AB, Vaughan ED Jr, Wein AJ (eds) Campbell’s urology, vol 3, 7th edn. WB Saunders, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, p 2742 Martin TV, Sosa RE (1998) Shock wave lithotripsy. In: Walsh PC, Retik AB, Vaughan ED Jr, Wein AJ (eds) Campbell’s urology, vol 3, 7th edn. WB Saunders, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, p 2742
26.
go back to reference Spirnak JP, Resnik IM (1990) Ureteroscopy, Chap 15: urolithiazis, pp 253–276 Spirnak JP, Resnik IM (1990) Ureteroscopy, Chap 15: urolithiazis, pp 253–276
27.
go back to reference Stackl W, Marberger M (1986) Late sequelae of the management of ureteral calculi with the ureterorenoscope. J Urol 136(2):386–389PubMed Stackl W, Marberger M (1986) Late sequelae of the management of ureteral calculi with the ureterorenoscope. J Urol 136(2):386–389PubMed
28.
go back to reference Schmeller N, Schuller J, Knipper A, Hofstetter A. Behandlung von harnleitersteinen ohne Schnittoperatidnen Ver.dt Ges Urol 38, Tagung Würzburg Springer Verlag Berlin, pp 324–325 Schmeller N, Schuller J, Knipper A, Hofstetter A. Behandlung von harnleitersteinen ohne Schnittoperatidnen Ver.dt Ges Urol 38, Tagung Würzburg Springer Verlag Berlin, pp 324–325
29.
go back to reference Ceylan K, Sünbül O, Şahin A, Güneş M (2005) Ureteroscopic treatment of ureteral lithiasis with pneumatic lithotripsy: analysis of 287 procedures in a public hospital. Urol Res 33(6):422–425PubMedCrossRef Ceylan K, Sünbül O, Şahin A, Güneş M (2005) Ureteroscopic treatment of ureteral lithiasis with pneumatic lithotripsy: analysis of 287 procedures in a public hospital. Urol Res 33(6):422–425PubMedCrossRef
30.
go back to reference Fernandez De la Maza S, Noldus J, Huland H (1999) Ureterorenoscopy (URS) in treatment of ureteral calculi. I. Safety and effectiveness of URS as auxiliary treatment after ESWL. Urol A 38(2):128–132CrossRef Fernandez De la Maza S, Noldus J, Huland H (1999) Ureterorenoscopy (URS) in treatment of ureteral calculi. I. Safety and effectiveness of URS as auxiliary treatment after ESWL. Urol A 38(2):128–132CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Schuster TG, Hollenbeck BK, Faerber GJ, Wolf JS Jr (2001) Complications of ureteroscopy: analysis of predictive factors. J Urol 166(2):538–540PubMedCrossRef Schuster TG, Hollenbeck BK, Faerber GJ, Wolf JS Jr (2001) Complications of ureteroscopy: analysis of predictive factors. J Urol 166(2):538–540PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Does stone dimension affect the effectiveness of ureteroscopic lithotripsy in distal ureteral stones?
Authors
Volkan Tuğcu
Ali İhsan Taşcı
Emin Özbek
Bekir Aras
Levent Verim
Levent Gürkan
Publication date
01-06-2008
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
International Urology and Nephrology / Issue 2/2008
Print ISSN: 0301-1623
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2584
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-007-9278-7

Other articles of this Issue 2/2008

International Urology and Nephrology 2/2008 Go to the issue