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

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Urology
Published in: BMC Urology 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research article

Surgical management of urolithiasis – a systematic analysis of available guidelines

Authors: Valentin Zumstein, Patrick Betschart, Dominik Abt, Hans-Peter Schmid, Cedric Michael Panje, Paul Martin Putora

Published in: BMC Urology | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Several societies around the world issue guidelines incorporating the latest evidence. However, even the most commonly cited guidelines of the European Association of Urology (EAU) and the American Urological Association (AUA) leave the clinician with several treatment options and differ on specific points. We aimed to identify discrepancies and areas of consensus between guidelines to give novel insights into areas where low consensus between the guideline panels exists, and therefore where more evidence might increase consensus.

Methods

The webpages of the 61 members of the Societé Internationale d’Urologie were analysed to identify all listed or linked guidelines. Decision trees for the surgical management of urolithiasis were derived, and a comparative analysis was performed to determine consensus and discrepancies.

Results

Five national and one international guideline (EAU) on surgical stone treatment were available for analysis. While 7 national urological societies refer to the AUA guidelines and 11 to the EAU guidelines, 43 neither publish their own guidelines nor refer to others. Comparative analysis revealed a high degree of consensus for most renal and ureteral stone scenarios. Nevertheless, we also identified a variety of discrepancies between the different guidelines, the largest being the approach to the treatment of proximal ureteral calculi and larger renal calculi.

Conclusions

Six guidelines with recommendations for the surgical treatment of urolithiasis to support urologists in decision-making were available for inclusion in our analysis. While there is a high grade of consensus for most stone scenarios, we also detected some discrepancies between different guidelines. These are, however, controversial situations where adequate evidence to assist with decision-making has yet to be elicited by further research.
Literature
1.
Assimos D, Krambeck A, Miller NL, Monga M, Murad MH, Nelson CP, Pace KT, Pais VM Jr, Pearle MS, Preminger GM, et al. Surgical Management of Stones: American urological association/Endourological society guideline, PART I. J Urol. 2016;196(4):1153–60.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Turk C, Petrik A, Sarica K, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, Straub M, Knoll T. EAU guidelines on interventional treatment for urolithiasis. Eur Urol. 2016;69(3):475–82.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Assimos D, Krambeck A, Miller NL, Monga M, Murad MH, Nelson CP, Pace KT, Pais VM Jr, Pearle MS, Preminger GM, et al. Surgical Management of Stones: American urological association/Endourological society guideline, part II. J Urol. 2016;196(4):1161–69.
4.
5.
Panje CM, Glatzer M, von Rappard J, Rothermundt C, Hundsberger T, Zumstein V, Plasswilm L, Putora PM. Applied swarm-based medicine: collecting decision trees for patterns of algorithms analysis. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017;17(1):123.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Panje CM, Dal Pra A, Zilli T, Zwahlen DR, Papachristofilou A, Herrera FG, Matzinger O, Plasswilm L, Putora PM. Consensus and differences in primary radiotherapy for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer in Switzerland: a survey on patterns of practice. Strahlenther Onkol. 2015;191(10):778–86.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Hundsberger T, Hottinger AF, Roelcke U, Roth P, Migliorini D, Dietrich PY, Conen K, Pesce G, Hermann E, Pica A, et al. Patterns of care in recurrent glioblastoma in Switzerland: a multicentre national approach based on diagnostic nodes. J Neuro-Oncol. 2016;126(1):175–83.CrossRef
8.
Rothermundt C, Bailey A, Cerbone L, Eisen T, Escudier B, Gillessen S, Grunwald V, Larkin J, McDermott D, Oldenburg J, et al. Algorithms in the first-line treatment of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma--analysis using diagnostic nodes. Oncologist. 2015;20(9):1028–35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Rothermundt C, von Rappard J, Eisen T, Escudier B, Grunwald V, Larkin J, McDermott D, Oldenburg J, Porta C, Rini B, et al. Second-line treatment for metastatic clear cell renal cell cancer: experts’ consensus algorithms. World J Urol. 2017;35(4):641–8.
10.
Rothermundt C, Fischer GF, Bauer S, Blay JY, Grunwald V, Italiano A, Kasper B, Kollar A, Lindner LH, Miah A, et al. Pre- and postoperative chemotherapy in localized extremity soft tissue sarcoma: a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer expert survey. Oncologist. 2017; https://​doi.​org/​10.​1634/​theoncologist.​2017-0391.
11.
SAU-Sociedad-Argentina-de-Urologia: GUIAS EN TRATAMIENTO DE LITIASIS RENAL. 2014.
12.
SAU-Sociedad-Argentina-de-Urologia: GUIAS EN TRATAMIENTO DE LITIASIS URETERAL. 2014.
13.
14.
Conort P, Dore B, Saussine C, Comite Lithiase de l'Association Francaise dU. Guidelines for the urological management of renal and ureteric stones in adults. Prog Urol. 2004;14(6):1095–102.PubMed
15.
Knoll T, Bach T, Humke U, Neisius A, Stein R, Schonthaler M, Wendt-Nordahl G. S2k guidelines on diagnostics, therapy and metaphylaxis of urolithiasis (AWMF 043/025) : compendium. Urologe A. 2016;55(7):904–22.CrossRefPubMed
16.
SUA-Singapore-Urological-Association: The Management of Urolithiasis. 2001.
17.
Danuser H, Muller R, Descoeudres B, Dobry E, Studer UE. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of lower calyx calculi: how much is treatment outcome influenced by the anatomy of the collecting system? Eur Urol. 2007;52(2):539–46.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Pearle MS, Lingeman JE, Leveillee R, Kuo R, Preminger GM, Nadler RB, Macaluso J, Monga M, Kumar U, Dushinski J, et al. Prospective, randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi 1 cm or less. J Urol. 2005;173(6):2005–9.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Sahinkanat T, Ekerbicer H, Onal B, Tansu N, Resim S, Citgez S, Oner A. Evaluation of the effects of relationships between main spatial lower pole calyceal anatomic factors on the success of shock-wave lithotripsy in patients with lower pole kidney stones. Urology. 2008;71(5):801–5.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Srisubat A, Potisat S, Lojanapiwat B, Setthawong V, Laopaiboon M. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;4:CD007044.
21.
Mi Y, Ren K, Pan H, Zhu L, Wu S, You X, Shao H, Dai F, Peng T, Qin F, et al. Flexible ureterorenoscopy (F-URS) with holmium laser versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for treatment of renal stone <2 cm: a meta-analysis. Urolithiasis. 2016;44(4):353–65.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Dell'Atti L, Papa S. Ten-year experience in the management of distal ureteral stones greater than 10 mm in size. G Chir. 2016;37(1):27–30.PubMedPubMedCentral
23.
Knoll T, Fritsche HM, Rassweiler J. Medical and economic aspects of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Aktuelle Urol. 2011;42(6):363–7.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Tiselius HG, Chaussy CG. Arguments for choosing extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for removal of urinary tract stones. Urolithiasis. 2015;43(5):387–96.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Wen CC, Nakada SY. Treatment selection and outcomes: renal calculi. Urol Clin North Am. 2007;34(3):409–19.CrossRefPubMed
26.
27.
Galvin DJ, Pearle MS. The contemporary management of renal and ureteric calculi. BJU Int. 2006;98(6):1283–8.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Surgical management of urolithiasis – a systematic analysis of available guidelines
Authors
Valentin Zumstein
Patrick Betschart
Dominik Abt
Hans-Peter Schmid
Cedric Michael Panje
Paul Martin Putora
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Urology / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2490
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-018-0332-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

BMC Urology 1/2018 Go to the issue

Research article

Non-ischemic laparoscopic partial nephrectomy using 1318-nm diode laser for small exophytic renal tumors

Research article

Decolonization potential of 0.02% polyhexanide irrigation solution in urethral catheters under practice-like in vitro conditions

Research article

Continuous saline bladder irrigation for two hours following transurethral resection of bladder tumors in patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer does not prevent recurrence or progression compared with intravesical Mitomycin-C

Study protocol

Multiparametric ultrasound: evaluation of greyscale, shear wave elastography and contrast-enhanced ultrasound for prostate cancer detection and localization in correlation to radical prostatectomy specimens

Research article

Preoperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio predicts the surgical outcome of Xp11.2 translocation/TFE3 renal cell carcinoma patients

Research article

Ameliorative effects of rutin against cisplatin-induced reproductive toxicity in male rats