Minimally invasive treatment of hemiacidrin soluble staghorn renal stones

Among 78 patients with hemiacidrin soluble staghorn renal stones, 23 were treated with a combination of one session of percutaneous debulking and high-energy extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) (Group A); 17 were treated with high-energy ESWL only (Group B); and 38 were treated with low-energy only ESWL (Group C). In all patients percutaneous nephrostomies were inserted and the ESWL procedure was followed by hemiacidrin irrigation. ESWL was performed with anesthesia in Groups A and B, but without anesthesia in Group C. Groups A and B did not differ in number of ESWL sessions or length of hospital stay, and the therapeutic results at discharge and at 6-month follow-up were comparable, whereby 59% of the patients in both groups were either stone-free or had only small ( less than or equal to 3 mm) residual fragments. In Group C more ESWL sessions were performed, and the hospital stay as well as the hemiacidrin irrigation periods were longer. The fraction of stone-free renal units at discharge was significantly higher in Group C than in Group A (p less than 0.05) and after 4 weeks higher than in both Groups A (p less than 0.025) and B (p < 0.05). At 6 month follow-up, 92% of the patients in Group C were either stone-free or had only small ( less than or equal to 3 mm) residual fragments. Combined low-energy ESWL and hemiacidrin irrigation can successfully be used for treatment of even very large infection staghorn stones.     

The staghorn calculus: anatrophic nephrolithotomy versus percutaneous litholapxy and extracorporeal shockwave therapy versus extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy monotherapy. A report of over 6 years' experience

From 1982 to December 1987, 71 with incomplete (C4 by Rocco) and 37 with complete (C5 by Rocco) staghorn calculi underwent anatrophic nephrolithotomy (AN; n = 29), or combined percutaneous nephrostolithotomy and ESWL (PCNL + ESWL; n = 21), or ESWL monotherapy without or with preoperative JJ stenting (n = 37/21). The patients with incomplete staghorn calculi (C4) and preoperative ureteral stenting were free of stones after 6 months in 15 of 17 cases (88%), which is comparable to our results with AN (90%) and combined PCNL + ESWL (85%). ESWL without JJ stenting were free of stones in only 52%. The treatment of infected C4 calculi with JJ stenting was especially successful (92%). Complete staghorn calculi (C5) represented the best results after AN (78%) and combined PCNL + ESWL (75%), in contrast to ESWL without JJ stenting (44%). Four patients with C5 calculi were treated with ESWL and preoperative stenting, three of them were free of stones after 6 months. For incomplete staghorn calculi (C4), ESWL monotherapy with JJ stenting seems to be a justifiable noninvasive method which offers excellent results in stone elimination (88%), with lower costs than AN or PCNL + ESWL. More invasive procedures should be reserved for complete staghorn calculi.     

Are prophylactic antibiotics necessary during extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy?

A randomised clinical study was carried out on patients admitted for ESWL treatment in order to establish the requirement for prophylactic treatment with antibiotics during this procedure. Patients with clinical signs of urinary tract infection, evidence of infectious stones or a positive urine culture were excluded. All other patients were consecutively randomised into 3 groups which were given either trimethoprim + sulphamethoxazole or mecillinam (Group A), methenamine hippurate (Group B), or no treatment at all (Group C). Evaluation with respect to clinical signs of infection was done immediately after the treatment and 4 weeks later. In addition, a urine culture was performed 2 weeks after ESWL, i.e. 1 week after completing treatment with antibiotics and methenamine hippurate. With respect to infectious complications there were no differences between Groups A and C, between Groups B and C or between Group A and B+C, whereas an unexplained slightly higher infectious rate was recorded for Group B compared with Group A. In all patients the occurrence of bacteriuria was low (6.7%) despite the fact that almost 30% of patients had a ureteric catheter during the ESWL procedure. Patients with ureteric catheters did not present with more infectious complications than those without. All patients had a bladder catheter during ESWL. It was concluded that prophylactic treatment with antibiotics during ESWL treatment is unnecessary in all situations where an infectious aetiology is unlikely.     

合用阿托品输尿管逆行造影联合IVU定位行ESWL治疗输尿管阴性结石疗效观察(附138例报告)

目的:探讨合用阿托品输尿管逆行造影联合IVU定位行ESWL治疗输尿管阴性结石的临床效果。方法:术前138例患者经B超、IVU、CT检查确诊输尿管阴性结石。采用IVU联合应用阿托品针、碘海醇针合剂经输尿管导管持续微泵泵入,行逆行造影(RGU)辅助,经X线定位后,明确结石的部位及大小后行ESWL治疗。留置输尿管导管综合排石治疗3～5天,观察临床碎石效果。结果:本组138例患者经1次ESWL治疗后2～4周,121例(87.8%)结石完全排净,第2次ESWL治疗结石排净10例(7.2%),第3次ESWL治疗结石排净2例(1.4%);2例(1.4%)形成"石街",需行输尿管镜取石;无效3例(2.2%),行开放手术取石,证实结石有炎性肉芽包裹。结论:合用阿托品输尿管逆行造影联合IVU定位行ESWL治疗输尿管阴性结石临床疗效确切,术后留置输尿管导管逆行灌注冲洗利于排石。     

A retrospective analysis of 3 year''s experience of an interdisciplinary approach to gallstone disease including shock-waves

1206 patients with gallstone disease were treated between January 1985 and December 1987, using an interdisciplinary concept that included surgery, endoscopic sphincterotomy, and extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL). Twenty-five per cent of the patients who were admitted for gallbladder stones were treated by ESWL, whereas 75% underwent surgery. Mortality of elective treatment for gallbladder stones amounted to 0.25% (0.4% in surgery, 0% in ESWL). Postoperative complication rate was low (4.2% in surgery, 7.0% in ESWL). After ESWL treatment, 80% of the patients were free of stones after a follow-up period of 1 year. Recurrence rate in these patients amounted up to 10%; in seven of 70 patients, mean follow-up period was 6 months after complete disappearance of stones. Twenty-seven per cent of all patients who were admitted for bile duct stones underwent surgery, whereas in the other 73%, calculi were removed via endoscopy. ESWL treatment was used additionally, if necessary. Fragments were left behind in three of 75 patients (4.0%) after surgical treatment, and in 7 of 200 patients (3.5%) after endoscopic and ESWL treatment, respectively. In the latter group, three patients (1.5%) required an additional operation. There were no deaths in either of the groups. The use of ESWL for treatment of gallbladder stones needs to be evaluated in long-term follow-up studies. Thus far, surgery remains the dominating method. Endoscopic procedures, eventually combined with ESWL, represent the preferred treatment for patients with bile duct stones.     

Efficacy of expulsive therapy using nifedipine or tamsulosin,both associated with ketoprofene,after shock wave lithotripsy of ureteral stones

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is currently considered one of the main treatments for ureteral stones. Some studies have reported the effectiveness of pharmacologic therapies (calcium antagonists or alpha-blockers) in facilitating ureteral stone expulsion after ESWL. We prospectively evaluated the efficacy, after ESWL, of nifedipine on upper-middle ureteral stones, and tamsulosin on lower ureteral stones, both associated to ketoprofene as anti-edema agent. From January 2003 to March 2005 we prospectively evaluated 113 patients affected by radiopaque or radiolucent ureteral stones. Average stone size was 10.16 ± 2.00 mm (range 6–14 mm). Thirty-seven stones were located in the upper ureter, 27 in the middle ureter, and 49 in the lower ureter. All patients received a single session of ESWL (mean number of shock waves: 3,500) by means of a Dornier Lithotripter S (mean energy power for each treatment: 84%). Both ultrasound and X-ray were used for stone scanning. After treatment, 63 of 113 patients were submitted to medical therapy to aid stone expulsion: nifedipine 30 mg/day for 14 days administered to 35 patients with upper-middle ureteral stones (group A1) and tamsulosin 0.4 mg/day for 14 days administered to 28 patients with stones located in the distal ureter (group A2). The remaining 50 patients were used as a control group (29 upper–middle ureteral stones—B1—and 21 lower ureteral stones—B2—), receiving only pain-relieving therapy. No significant difference in stone size between the groups defined was observed. Stone clearance was assessed 1 and 2 months after ESWL by means of KUB, ultrasound scan and/or excretory urography. A stone-free condition was defined as complete stone clearance or the presence of residual fragments smaller than 3 mm in diameter. The stone-free rates in the expulsive medical therapy group were 85.7 and 82.1% for the nifedipine (A1) and tamsulosin (A2) groups respectively; stone-free rates in the control groups were 51.7 and 57.1% (B1 and B2, respectively). Five patients (14.3%) in group A1, 5 (17.8%) in group A2, 14 (48.3%) in group B1 and 9 (42.8%) in group B2 were not stone-free after a single ESWL session and required ESWL re-treatment or an endoscopic treatment. Medical therapy following ESWL to facilitate ureteral stone expulsion results in increased 1- and 2-month stone-free rates and in a lower percentage of those needing re-treatment. The efficacy of nifedipine for the upper-mid ureteral tract associated with ketoprofene makes expulsive medical therapy suitable for improving overall outcomes of ESWL treatment for ureteral stones.     

Value of focal applied energy quotient in treatment of ureteral lithiasis with shock waves

The treatment of ureteral lithiasis by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is progressively being abandoned owing to advances in endoscopic lithotripsy. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the causes as to why ESWL is less effective-with a measurable parameter: focal applied energy quotient (FAEQ) that allows us to apply an improvement project in ESWL results for ureteral lithiasis. A prospective observational cohort study with 3-year follow-up and enrollment period was done with three groups of cases. In Group A, 83 cases of ureteral lithiasis were treated by endoscopic lithotripsy using Holmiun:YAG laser. In Group B, 81 cases of ureteral lithiasis were treated by ESWL using Doli-S device (EMSE 220F-XXP). In Group C, 65 cases of ureteral lithiasis were treated by ESWL using Doli-S device (EMSE 220F-XXP) (FAEQ >10). Statistical study and calculation of RR, NNT, Chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, and Student's t test were done. Efficiency quotient (EQ) and focal applied energy quotient [FAEQ = (radioscopy seconds/number of shock waves) × ESWL session J] were analyzed. From the results, the success rate of the treatment using Holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy and ESWL is found to be 94 and 48%, respectively, with a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001). Success rate of endoscopic laser lithotripsy for lumbar ureteral stones was 82% versus 57% of ESWL (p = 0.611). In Group B, FAEQ was 8.12. In Group C, success rate was 93.84% with FAEQ of 10.64%. When we compare results from endoscopic lithotripsy with Holmium:YAG laser in Group B with results from ESWL with FAEQ >10, we do not observe absolute benefit choosing one or the other. In conclusion, the application of ESWL with FAEQ >10, that is, improving radiologic focalization of the calculus and increasing the number of Joules/SW, makes possible a treatment as safe and equally efficient as Holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy in ureteral lithiasis less than 13 mm.     

ESWL与输尿管镜碎石联合处理上尿路结石

目的：探讨对部分上尿路结石采用ESWI．与输尿管镜碎石联合处理的方法。方法：对70例上尿路结石患者采用ESWI。与输尿管镜下钬激光碎石（URS）联合交替治疗。其中输尿管结石48例,。肾结石22例。结果：结石总排净率为91．4％00（64／70）,其中输尿管结石排净率为95．8％（46／48）,肾结石排净率为81．8％（18／22）。3例治疗失败,其中1例输尿管结石因输尿管狭窄无法入镜;另2例肾结石,1例因交替治疗次数过多中途停止治疗,1例因结石硬度过大ESWI,不佳,均改为PCNL术。结论：ESW[。与URS联合交替进行的疗法处理上尿路结石,避免了创伤性治疗,扩大了ESWI,治疗范围,降低了URS手术难度,缩短了URS操作时间,提高了结石排净率,患者创伤微小、恢复快、并发症少,是治疗上尿路结石,特别是部分复杂性上尿路结石较理想的方法之一。     

Treatment of ureteral stone disease: the role of ESWL and endourology

Summary In recent years, extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) has proved a safe and easily reproducible method for the treatment of calculi in the upper urinary tract above the iliac crest. Current indications for ESWL as single therapy encompass approximately 60%–70% of all stones. The use of endourological methods as auxiliary procedures can enhance the range of indications to 95% of all renal stones and 85% of all ureteral stones. In the last year, 1340 patients have been successfully treated for urinary calculi at our department. Evaluation of all stone cases shows that ESWL alone, ESWL combined with percutaneous techniques, or percutaneous techniques alone were performed on 93% of all patients. Only 7% of patients had to undergo open surgical treatment, 1% for renal stones and 15% for ureteral stones. Ureteral stones are still among the problem stones for ESWL, in many cases requiring time-consuming combined procedures with either of the percutaneous methods. Furthermore, ureteral obstruction caused by stone particles as a complication after ESWL-treatment of large renal stones has to be relieved using percutaneous techniques. In this report we describe our approach in detail and discuss our results.     

不同体位在ESWL治疗输尿管上段结石的疗效中的影响

目的 探讨体位（仰卧位和俯卧位）是否影响ESWL治疗输尿管上段结石的治疗效果。方法对2005年3月～2006年12月输尿管上段结石病人136例随机分为两组行ESWL治疗,行仰卧位治疗组70例（组1）,俯卧位治疗组66例（组2）。术前行IVU和KUB检查定位,记录每个病人从治疗到无石过程的结石大小、治疗次数、每次治疗的冲击次数。结果达到无石的治疗次数两组接近,仰卧位组（1．9±0．8）和俯卧位组（1．8±0．7）,（P=0．78）。每次治疗的平均冲击波次数二者差别不大,仰卧位组（3055．1±346.3）和俯卧位组（3137．5±621．0）,（P=0．95）。ESWL后总共有112例（82．5％）病人达到了无石;其余的24例（17．5％）不能排除结石。仰卧位组的排石率为82％,俯卧位组的排石率为83％。两组排石率没有统计学差异（P=0．90）。两组的并发症都很少．仅有轻微的血尿,尿急,尿痛,和腰痛,口服药物后均可缓解。结论对于ESWL治疗输尿管上段结石来说,俯卧位和仰卧位同样安全有效。     

移植肾尿路结石46例诊治体会

目的探讨肾移植术后尿路结石的诊断和治疗,提高长期存活率。方法回顾性分析1980年1月至2011年6月46例移植肾结石患者的临床资料。结果 35例为肉眼血尿,10例为体检时B超发现,1例为急性无尿发病,均无肾绞痛。移植肾结石24例,移植输尿管结石22例,结石大小0.7～2.0 cm,结石发病时间为术后3.5（0.4～15）年。42例行体外冲击波碎石（ES-WL）,其中3例无效行输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术和1例行经皮肾镜取石术（PCNL）,4例尿酸结石给予枸橼酸氢钾钠（友来特）药物治疗。随访3个月：42例ESWL中,结石排净36例（85.72%）,结石残留2例（4.76%）,4例（9.52%）无效改用腔镜治疗后结石排出;4例尿酸结石口服枸橼酸氢钾钠结石大部分排出。结论移植肾结石缺乏典型肾绞痛表现,体外冲击波碎石术是治疗移植肾结石安全、有效的主要方法。     

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for large renal stones. To what size is extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy alone feasible?

The complications after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for large renal calculi could be reduced by insertion of ureteral stents. In a prospective study, the critical stone size for ESWL combined with ureteral stenting was looked for. Sixty consecutive patients entered the study, 17 patients suffered from renal calculi with a length of greater than 4 cm and a width of greater than 3 cm (group 1), and in 43 patients the calculi measured between 4 x 3 and 2.5 x 1.5 cm2 (group 2). ESWL was performed with the Dornier apparatus HM-3. A ureteral stent was placed immediately before ESWL. In group 1 with very large stones, significantly more obstructive problems were encountered. Three months after ESWL, only 6 of 14 (43%) were free of stones or with stone material likely to discharge spontaneously. In group 2, a success rate of 25 of 29 (86%) was noticed, which was considered satisfactory. For most stones greater than 4 x 3 cm2 the combination of percutaneous nephrolithotomy and ESWL seems to be the preferred treatment.     

输尿管结石继发严重上尿路感染的联合治疗

目的：探讨输尿管结石继发严重上尿路感染的治疗方法与疗效。方法：回顾性分析32例输尿管结石梗阻继发急性严重上尿路感染患者的临床治疗方法：在积极抗感染的同时,急诊行膀胱镜下逆行插管引流,或在B超引导下经皮肾穿刺置管引流,其中27例感染控制后二期行输尿管镜下碎石或ESWL,3例在抗感染同时行ESWL,2例在抗感染同时行输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石术。结果：19例膀胱镜下逆行插管成功,8例在B超引导下行经皮肾穿刺造瘘术成功,3～6天后患者体温和血白细胞数降至正常。二期14例行输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石术成功,13例行ESWL成功。在抗感染同时一期行ESWL或输尿管镜的5例碎石成功。所有患者无输尿管穿孔、输尿管撕裂、严重出血等并发症。术后1～8周输尿管结石全部排净,平均住院28．5天。结石排净后随访1～9个月,患肾功能全部恢复正常。结论：膀胱镜下逆行插管引流或经皮肾穿刺造瘘引流联合输尿管镜下碎石或ESWL简便,耐受性好,并发症少,可迅速控制感染,清除结石,二者联合应用是输尿管结石继发急性严重上尿路感染的理想治疗方法。     

Monotherapy with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for renal and ureteral stones]

We performed extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) as a monotherapy using the Medstone STS lithotripter on 288 patients with renal and ureteral stones between June, 1989 and June, 1991. We compared our results with previous reports on ESWL as used in combination therapy. Our cases consisted of 121 patients with renal stones and 167 patients with ureteral stones. A total of 437 sessions of lithotripsy were performed on 288 patients, for an average of 1.52 sessions of lithotripsy per patient. The percentage of stones measuring less than 4.0 mm in diameter that were fragmented was 94.3% for renal stones and 87.6% for ureteral stones. The stone-free rates 3 months after ESWL were 60.3% and 90.4%, respectively. Our results of the monotherapy with ESWL did not differ from those reported on ESWL as used in combination therapy, in terms of the rate of stone destruction and stone-free rates. We studied the other reports carefully and determined that ESWL monotherapy could have been performed in most those cases. We concluded that ESWL monotherapy is an excellent therapeutic method in the light of fewer complications and side effects compared with those from combination therapy, and the fact that the rate of recurrence for renal and ureteral stones is high makes ESWL monotherapy very useful because the procedure can be repeated.     

体外冲击波碎石治疗肾盏结石244例

目的：探讨体外冲击波碎石（ＥＳＷＬ）治疗肾盏结石的效果。方法：对ＥＳＷＬ治疗的肾盏结石２４４例（肾上盏结石５７例,肾中盏结石１８例及肾下盏结石１６９例）进行回顾性调查,ＥＳＷＬ后１个月及每６～１２个月行Ｘ线腹部平片或Ｂ超检查及临床随访。结果：肾上盏结石排净率为７３．７％,肾中盏结石为６１．１％,肾下盏结石为７８．７％。结论：ＣＳＷＬ仍是肾下盏结石的首选治疗方法。     

Clinical experiences of renal and upper ureter stone by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). II: 3-month follow-up of cases treated with ESWL

Fifty three out of 60 cases treated with Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL), were followed up for 3 months. Forty four of the patients had renal stones (2 had bilateral renal stones, 3 had staghorn calculi, 2 had incomplete staghorn calculi, 10 had multiple renal stones), 2 had the unilateral renal and ureteral stones and 16 had ureteral stone. The stone had been discharged completely within 3 months in 47 cases (86.8%), and residual stones were noticed in 6 cases (11%), two of which had stone discharge after retreatment with ESWL. The other cases are being followed up without further treatment, because the residual sandy stones are thought to be able to be discharged spontaneously.     

Management of painful caliceal stones by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy

One hundred and seven patients with caliceal stones causing flank pain were treated by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), followed up and reviewed. The total stone-free rate 3 months after ESWL was 38.8%. The total pain-free rate was 50.5%. The pain-free rate was 85% in the stone-free group and 29% in the group with residual stones. No significant differences between the stone-free rate and the duration of pain or age was noted. Patients with abnormal intravenous pyelography (IVP) had a lower stone-free rate than patients with normal IVP (16 vs. 45%, p less than 0.05). The complications included: 6 cases of stone street formation with spontaneous passage; 1 case of stone street formation needing percutaneous nephrolithotomy for drainage; 1 perirenal hematoma; 9 cases of severe colic pain following ESWL; 3 cases of fever following ESWL, and 4 cases of hydronephrosis due to a stone in the ureterovesicle junction. These results show that ESWL is an effective, noninvasive treatment for painful caliceal stones.     

Treatment of lithiasis in the patient with a solitary kidney

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) has been the fundamental treatment applied to 88 patients with renal calculi in a solitary kidney. Epidemiological information is given, including lithiasis antecedents and associated pathologies as well as the etiology of the solitary kidney, location and size of stones. The initial treatment was ESWL in 83 patients, ureteroscopy in 2, surgery in 2, and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in 1. Three months after treatment in the ESWL group, 68 patients were completely free of stones and 15 had insignificant caliceal residual fragments. The rest of the patients were treated successfully using the above methods. The secondary complications of ESWL were colic pain (20 cases), fever (13 cases) and obstruction (9 cases).     

Clinical experience with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in upper urinary tract stones

We treated 100 patients of upper urinary tract stone using extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), from April to October 1986. Eighty-six of the patients were treated by ESWL monotherapy, and the other cases required further treatment, such as percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL), and transurethral ureterolithotripsy (TUL). On the X-ray film obtained from one to three months after ESWL, 73 patients had no stones, 8 patients had sandy stones, 7 patients had small fragments less than 5 mm, 2 patients had large stones equal to or greater than 5 mm and 10 patients could not be followed up. Therefore, 97.7% of all patients were successfully treated. In conclusion, ESWL is considered to be an ideal method to treat upper urinary tract stones, and soon will become the first choice of treatment of urolithiasis together with the progress in endourological techniques.     

经尿道输尿管镜联合体外震波碎石治疗输尿管结石256报告

目的探讨输尿管镜联合体外震波碎石（extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy，ESWL）治疗输尿管结石的价值。方法2005年10月-2007年6月采用输尿管镜联合ESWL治疗输尿管结石256例，中段（56例）及下段（170例）结石用输尿管镜取石，上段（30例）结石用ESWL碎石，输尿管镜取石失败或结石残留联合ESWL治疗。结果输尿管下段结石一期结石清除率98．2％（167／170），中段结石一期结石清除率89．2％（50／56），上段结石一期结石清除率73．3％（22／30）。输尿管穿孔3例，输尿管黏膜撕脱1例，结石远端输尿管扭曲进镜致使尿管穿孔改切开取石1例，输尿管镜取石失败或结石残留联合ESWL治疗二期结石清除率91．7％（11／12）。结论输尿管镜治疗输尿管下段及中段结石成功率高，输尿管镜取石失败或结石残留联合ESWL可提高二期结石清除率。