Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy compared with ureteroscopy for the removal of small distal ureteral stones

INTRODUCTION: The treatment of small distal ureteral stones smaller or equal to 5 mm in size is still highly controversial. In distal ureteral stones larger than 5 mm in size, ureteroscopy (URS) has been shown in many studies to be superior to shockwave lithotripsy (SWL). The objective was to analyze the stone-free rate after treatment of distal ureteral stones with in situ SWL or URS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 3,857 SWL treatments were performed at our institution between 1996 and 2001. During this period 45 in situ SWL procedures were performed with the Dornier MFL 5000 lithotripter on distal ureteral stones regardless of the stone size. A total of 262 URS treatments were performed on distal ureteral stones. URS for small (5 mm or less) distal ureteral stones was performed in 110 cases. RESULTS: Distal ureteral stones smaller or equal to 5 mm in size were treated successfully stone free in 78% in one SWL session. Patients required a second SWL in 14% of the cases and 8% of the patients required a third SWL session. URS patients were successfully stone free after the procedure in 97% of the cases. Failed URS that needed an additional URS were performed in 2 and 1% of the patients had one SWL in situ treatment. CONCLUSIONS: URS treatment has shown to be the therapy of choice for distal ureteral stones. It is more effective than SWL treatment in this stone location. In experienced hands URS is a safe though even more invasive procedure than SWL. This can be expected as urologists perform more than 40 URS procedures per year.     

Shockwave Lithotripsy Versus Ureteroscopic Treatment as Therapeutic Interventions for Stones of the Ureter (TISU): A Multicentre Randomised Controlled Non-inferiority Trial

BackgroundRenal stone disease is common and can cause emergency presentation with acute pain due to ureteric colic. International guidelines have stated the need for a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) to determine whether a non-invasive outpatient (shockwave lithotripsy [SWL]) or surgical (ureteroscopy [URS]) intervention should be the first-line treatment for those needing active intervention. This has implications for shaping clinical pathways.ObjectiveTo report a pragmatic multicentre non-inferiority RCT comparing SWL with URS.Design, setting, and participantsThis trial tested for non-inferiority of up to two sessions of SWL compared with URS as initial treatment for ureteric stones requiring intervention.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisThe primary outcome was whether further intervention was required to clear the stone, and secondary outcomes included quality of life assessment, severity of pain, and serious complications; these were based on questionnaires at baseline, 8 wk, and 6 mo. We included patients over 16 yr with a single ureteric stone clinically deemed to require intervention. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were planned.Results and limitationsThe study recruited between July 1, 2013 and June 30, 2017. We recruited 613 participants from a total of 1291 eligible patients, randomising 306 to SWL and 307 to URS. Sixty-seven patients (22.1%) in the SWL arm needed further treatment compared with 31 patients (10.3%) in the URS arm. The absolute risk difference was 11.7% (95% confidence interval 5.6%, 17.8%) in favour of URS, which was inside the 20% threshold we set for demonstrating noninferiority of SWL.ConclusionsThis RCT was designed to test whether SWL is non-inferior to URS and confirmed this; although SWL is an outpatient noninvasive treatment with potential advantages both for patients and for reducing the use of inpatient health care resources, the trial showed a benefit in overall clinical outcomes with URS compared with SWL, reflecting contemporary practice. The Therapeutic Interventions for Stones of the Ureter (TISU) study provides new evidence to help guide the choice of modality for this common health condition.Patient summaryWe present the largest trial comparing ureteroscopy versus extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for ureteric stones. While ureteroscopy had marginally improved outcome in terms of stone clearance, as expected, shockwave lithotripsy had better results in terms of health care costs. These results should enable patients and health care providers to optimise treatment pathways for this common urological condition.     

Opioid usage differs significantly following ureteroscopy and shockwave lithotripsy,while development of long-term usage is positively correlated with total days’ supply and total MME supplied

Purpose

This study evaluated possible predictors of long-term opioid usage among patients with ureteric stones who received ureteroscopy (URS) or shockwave lithotripsy (SWL). We also assessed opioid usage characteristics of URS and SWL recipients.

Materials and methods

This retrospective study used IQVIA PharMetrics^® Plus for Academics administrative claims database from years 2006–2020 to identify patients with a diagnosis of kidney or ureteral stones who were treated with either SWL or URS. We performed unadjusted bivariate analyses to compare opioid use characteristics of URS and SWL recipients, and performed logistic regression to determine demographic and clinical factors associated with becoming a long-term opioid user.

Results

The study population consisted of opioid naive individuals having a diagnosis of a kidney stone who underwent URS (N?=?9407) or SWL (N?=?4894). About 6.7% (N?=?964) of study subjects were long-term opioid users. Unadjusted bivariate associations showed that compared to non-long-term opioid users, long-term opioid users had significantly greater total days’ supply, total morphine milliequivalents (MME) supplied, and claims per month. A similar trend was observed for URS (vs. SWL) recipients. However, compared to SWL recipients, URS recipients had 14.3% (1.2–25.6%; p?=?0.034) lower odds of becoming long-term users. Total days’ supply (OR: 1.041 (95% CI 1.030–1.052; p?<?0.001) and total MME supplied (OR 1.001 (95% CI 1.000–1.001; p?<?0.001) were significantly associated with long-term usage.

Conclusion

Higher total days’ supply and total MME supplied as well as SWL were identified as risk factors for becoming long-term opioid users.

     

Treatment for extended-mid and distal ureteral stones: SWL or ureteroscopy? Results of a multicenter study

PURPOSE: In a randomized study, we analyzed the treatment results of ureterorenoscopy (URS) and shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) for extended-mid and distal ureteral stones. We investigated also, for reasons of cost effectiveness, the factors influencing the outcome, the complications, and the need for auxiliary procedures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In three regional hospitals, we selected 156 patients with extended-mid and distal ureteral stones. After randomization, 87 were treated with URS, and 69 with SWL. The treatment results were studied in relation to complications, the need for auxiliary procedures and stone factors, urinary tract infection (UTI), dilatation, and kidney function. RESULTS: After retreatment of 45% of the patients, the stone-free rate after 12 weeks in the SWL group was 51%. After a retreatment rate of 9% of the patients in the URS group, the stone-free rate was 91%. Including the number of auxiliary procedures, we calculated the Efficiency Quotient (EQ) as 0.50 for SWL and 0.38 for URS. After correction and redefinition of auxiliary procedures, the EQ was 0.66. The mean treatment time for SWL was 52 minutes and for URS 39 minutes. General anesthesia was more frequently needed in URS patients. Complications occurred more often in the URS group (22 v 3 and 24 v 13, respectively). These were mostly mild, and all could be treated with a double-J stent, antibiotics, or analgetics. A lower stone-free rate was achieved in patients with larger (> or =11 mm) stones (75% v 85% for smaller stones in the URS group and 17% v 73% in the SWL group. In the URS group, the stone-free rate of patients with extended-mid ureteral stones was lower than that of patients with distal ureteral stones. Calculating the costs for URS and SWL appeared impossible because of the differences in available equipment. CONCLUSION: The stone-free rate after URS is much higher than after SWL, and the EQ in our series was strongly dependent on definitions. The decision about how to treat a patient with an extended-mid or distal ureteral stone therefore should not be made primarily on the basis of cost effectiveness but rather on the basis of the availability of proper equipment, the experience of the urologist, and the preference of the patient.     

Endoscopic management of symptomatic caliceal diverticula: a retrospective comparison of percutaneous nephrolithotripsy and ureteroscopy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A myriad of minimally invasive options exist for managing symptomatic caliceal diverticula, including shockwave lithotripsy, percutaneous surgery, retrograde ureteroscopy, and laparoscopy. Yet no direct comparisons have been made in the literature of the relative treatment efficacy of ureteroscopy (URS) and percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PNL). A retrospective review of our patients was performed to determine the most appropriate endoscopic management option for patients with symptomatic caliceal diverticula. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between November of 1994 and April 2001, 39 patients presented with symptomatic caliceal diverticula, 37 of which contained calculi. Twenty-two patients (56%) underwent PNL, and 17 patients (44%) were managed by URS. Of the PNL group, 82% required the creation of a neoinfundibulotomy. The stone burden in the PNL group averaged 11.4 x 12.0 mm and that in the URS group 12.7 x 13.0 mm (p > 0.05). Pain, recurrent urinary tract infections, and nausea and vomiting were the presenting complaints in both subgroups of patients, with pain being by far the most common symptom. The average hospital stay was 2.8 days for the PNL group. All the URS procedures were performed on a same-day-surgery basis. Results, including stone-free, symptom-free, and complication rates, were compared for the two groups. RESULTS: Thirty-five percent of the URS group were symptom free at 6 weeks' follow-up, with an additional 29% reporting an improvement in pain, whereas 86% of the PNL group was completely symptom free at 6 weeks' follow-up. Only 19% of the URS group were stone free on follow-up intravenous urography v 78% of those undergoing PNL (three patients failed to return for follow-up imaging). It was not possible to identify the ostium of the stenotic infundibulum in 4 patients (24%) undergoing URS, and 7 patients (41%) eventually went on to PNL with ultimate success. The PNL was statistically better than URS in producing stone-free results for diverticula located in the upper pole and for stones <11 mm (p < 0.05). No complications occurred in the URS group; however, complications were identified in four patients after PNL. One patient developed clot urinary retention necessitating Foley catheterization and manual bladder irrigation; one patient experienced significant bleeding necessitating early cessation of the procedure. Two patients sustained intrathoracic complications, one a pneumothorax and the other a pneumohemothorax after supra-11(th) rib access. Both were managed successfully with tube thoracostomy. CONCLUSIONS: Our review clearly suggests an advantage of percutaneous management over ureteroscopy for complex posterior symptomatic caliceal diverticula, although with a slightly increased risk of complications. Therefore, PNL should be considered the primary modality for managing these difficult processes. In cases where the stenotic infundibulum cannot be traversed with a guidewire, creation of a neoinfundibulotomy permitted secure access to the collecting system while providing effective results.     

Endoscopy vs. extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy in the treatment of distal ureteral stones: ten years' experience.

BACKGROUND: The lower third is the location of the great majority of ureteral stones. Treatment of these stones remains controversial: in situ extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) vs. ureteroscopy (URS). METHODS: During the last decade, 633 distal ureteral calculi were treated at our institution using in situ SWL (Siemens Lithostar electromagnetic lithotripter) in 395 patients and URS (with 11.5F instrument and ultrasonic lithotripsy) in 228 patients. The patients' age and stone size were similar in the two groups. All SWL therapies were performed on an outpatient basis. RESULTS: The overall success rate was 99% for SWL, and the efficiency quotient (EQ) was 92.4%. The treatment was more effective for <10 mm calculi. In the URS group, there was a 92% overall success rate with an EQ at 91.2%. Compared with SWL, URS was more time consuming, at least for the initial cases; often required intravenous sedation; entailed routine placement of a ureteral stent; and more often led to hospitalization. On the other hand, stone clearance was rapid after URS, although most of the SWL patients were stone free at the end of 6 weeks. The cost was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSION: We believe that multiple factors should be considered when deciding the most appropriate approach to distal ureteral calculi. In situ SWL provides optimal first-line treatment for calculi < 10 mm, whereas URS is better reserved for stones >10 mm.     

Prospective, randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi 1 cm or less

PURPOSE: The optimal management of lower pole renal calculi is controversial. We compared shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) and ureteroscopy (URS) for the treatment of patients with small lower pole stones in a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 78 patients with 1 cm or less isolated lower pole stones were randomized to SWL or URS. The primary outcome measure was stone-free rate on noncontrast computerized tomography at 3 months. Secondary outcome parameters were length of stay, complication rates, need for secondary procedures and patient derived quality of life measures. RESULTS: A total of 67 patients randomized to SWL (32) or URS (35) completed treatment. The 2 groups were comparable with respect to age, sex, body mass index, side treated and stone surface area. Operative time was significantly shorter for SWL than URS (66 vs 90 minutes). At 3 months of followup 26 and 32 patients who underwent SWL and URS had radiographic followup that demonstrated a stone-free rate of 35% and 50%, respectively (p not significant). Intraoperative complications occurred in 1 SWL case (unable to target stone) and in 7 URS cases (failed access in 5 and perforation in 2), while postoperative complications occurred in 7 SWL and 7 URS cases. Patient derived quality of life measures favored SWL. CONCLUSIONS: This study failed to demonstrate a statistically significant difference in stone-free rates between SWL and URS for the treatment of small lower pole renal calculi. However, SWL was associated with greater patient acceptance and shorter convalescence.     

Ureteroscopy is more cost effective than shock wave lithotripsy for stone treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

A rising incidence of kidney stone disease has led to an increase in ureteroscopy (URS) and shock wave lithotripsy (SWL). Our aim was to compare the cost of URS and SWL for treatment of stones.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis based on Cochrane and PRISMA standards was conducted for all studies reporting on comparative cost of treatment between URS and SWL. The cost calculation was based on factual data presented in the individual studies as reported by the authors. English language articles from January 2001 to December 2017 using Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane library and Google Scholar were selected. Our study was registered with PROSPERO (International prospective register of systematic reviews)—registration number CRD 42017080350.

Results

A total of 12 studies involving 2012 patients (SWL-1243, URS-769) were included after initial identification and screening of 725 studies with further assessment of 27 papers. The mean stone size was 10 and 11 mm for SWL and URS, respectively, with stone location in the proximal ureter (n?=?8 studies), distal ureter (n?=?1), all locations in the ureter (n?=?1) and in the kidney (n?=?2). Stone free rates (84 vs. 60%) were favourable for URS compared to SWL (p?<?0.001). Complication rates (23 vs. 30%) were non-significantly in favor of SWL (p?=?0.11) whereas re-treatment rates (11 vs. 27%) were non-significantly in favor of URS (p?=?0.29). Mean overall cost was significantly lower for URS ($2801) compared to SWL ($3627) (p?=?0.03). The included studies had high risk of bias overall. On sub-analysis, URS was significantly cost-effective for both stones ?<?10 and ?≥?10 mm and for proximal ureteric stones.

Conclusion

There is limited evidence to suggest that URS is less expensive than SWL. However, due to lack of standardization, studies seem to be contradictory and further randomized studies are needed to address this issue.

     

The Role of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in the Management of Medium-Sized (1–2 cm) Lower-Pole Renal Calculi

Objectives : The objective of this study was to determine the efficacy (defined by stone-free rates) and safety of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) in the treatment of medium sized (1–2 cm) symptomatic lower pole renal calculi, and establishment of the short-term morbidity.

Methods : We performed a retrospective analysis of 60 evaluable patients who had undergone PNL for 1 to 2 cm diameter lower-pole (LP) stones between November 2006 to March 2009 and compared these results with other treatment modalities in published literature.

Results : In all cases, stones were located in the lower calix. Thirty-six procedures were performed on the left side, and 24 were performed on the right side. The mean time to access the collecting system was 20.4 minutes (range 8–70 min) and mean operative time was 62.2 minutes (range 13–155 min). Abdominal radiography performed on postoperative day 1 demonstrated a stone free status in 56 (93.3%) patients. However, 4 patients (6.7%) required ancillary procedures (secondary PNL in 1, retrograde intrarenal surgery in 1, and SWL in 2). After this secondary procedures a complete stone-free status was achieved in 98.3% of patients. The morbidity of patients undergoing PNL at our hospital was minimal, with a mean hospital stay of 3.7 days.

Conclusions : We demonstrated that, PNL is a safe and effective method for medium sized (1 to 2 cm) lower pole renal calculi and percutaneous removal should be considered the primary approach for lower pole stones greater than 10 mm.     

Asymptomatic Renal Stones—to Treat or Not to Treat

Purpose of Review

There are no current guidelines on the optimal management of asymptomatic renal stones. This review summarizes the current literature, focusing on more recent studies that have been done to grow the body of evidence on this topic.

Recent Findings

Recent studies have found that stone size is a significant predictor of need for future surgical intervention, with >?7 mm for pediatric population and >?4 mm for residual fragments after both PNL and ureteroscopy (URS). The role of URS has been better defined with a recent RCT concluding that URS and SWL had comparable outcomes for an asymptomatic lower pole stone <?1 cm.

Summary

The treatment decision for asymptomatic renal stones should take into consideration a variety of relevant patient and stone factors; however, ultimately, a shared decision-making approach should be used. In the properly counseled patient, active surveillance or prophylactic surgical intervention may be appropriate.

     

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL): alternatives and adjuvant procedures

Summary Within a short time, extensive statistics on ESWL have documented its efficiency in the treatment of most renal and ureteral stones. Approximately 20% of all stone patients, however, require additional or other forms of therapy, such as URS, PNL, or surgery. Up to now, the differential indications for these procedures have not been completely established. A crucial factor for successful application of ESWL is stone volume and localization. Large stones with a central stone mass may be successfully treated by combining ESWL and PNL, while surgery is still preferred in those with a peripheral stone mass.     

Comparison of holmium laser and pneumatic lithotripsy in managing upper-ureteral stones

OBJECTIVE: To compare the success rates and complications of Lithoclast and holmium laser-assisted ureterorenoscopy (URS) in managing upper-ureteral stones. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the records of 394 patients with upper-ureteral stone who underwent ureteroscopic lithotripsy at our institution from January 2000 to December 2005. In 193 patients (mean stone size 12.3 mm), pneumatic lithotripsy was used; in 201 patients (mean stone size 11.5 mm), laser lithotripsy was performed. Patients were monitored as outpatients at 2 weeks, at 3 months, and then annually with a kidneys, ureters, and bladder radiograph and ultrasonography. Patients with migrated stones or incomplete clearance underwent an auxiliary procedure such as shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) or repeated URS. Follow-up ranged from 6 to 24 months. RESULTS: Fragmentation of stones to fine pieces that pass eventually was assessed at 2 weeks. This did not include proximal migration of a stone or fragments that required auxiliary treatment. This occurred in 166/193 (86.01%) patients in the Lithoclast group and in 195/201 (97.01%) in the laser group. Ureteral perforations were nine in the Lithoclast group and six in the laser group. Auxiliary procedures included SWL (27/193 [13.98%] patients in the Lithoclast group and 4/201 [1.99%] patients in the laser group) or repeated URS (two in the Lithoclast group). Urosepsis after URS occurred in 11/193 patients in the Lithoclast group and 5/201 patients in the laser group. CONCLUSION: In our study, the fragmentation rates of holmium laser-assisted ureteroscopy were significantly better in the upper ureter. The complications and the need for auxiliary procedures were significantly less for holmium laser-assisted ureteroscopy when compared with pneumatic lithotripsy.     

Modern Stone Management in Children

Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) for the treatment of pediatric stone disease was initiated almost three decades ago, ushering in a new era of noninvasive techniques for stone disintegration in children. Initially, all urinary stones—regardless of their size, site, or composition—were treated by this modality, eliminating the necessity of open surgery. SWL became less painful and more accessible for children when modern modular lithotripters, with smaller foci and better stone-targeting options, were introduced. Stone-free rates (SFRs) vary between 46% and 100%, depending on patient, lithotripter, and stone factors. Short- and long-term complications are rare. Recent refinements in endoscope design and intrarenal and ureteral imaging have added percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and ureteroscopy (URS) as alternatives to SWL for stone disintegration in children and infants. The main advantage of these modalities over SWL is their ability to actively remove stone fragments from the urinary system to achieve better SFRs compared with SWL in ureteral and large renal calculi. Current stone management guidelines for children have been established and updated by the European Association of Urology. Hand- and robot-assisted laparoscopic pyelolithtomy have recently been introduced for special cases. We conclude that SWL is an effective and safe treatment modality for small renal stones and for upper ureteral calculi but not for cysteine stones. URS is very efficient for distal ureteral stones and recently has become more popular for renal stones. PCNL is the first-line treatment for large or staghorn calculi.     

Perkutane Nephrolithotomie

The introduction of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) marked a turning point in the interventional treatment of nephrolithiasis. For the first time, the minimally invasive removal of larger kidney stones, which had previously required open surgery, became possible. With the increasing use of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) during the 1980s, PNL lost clinical importance. However, since SWL has revealed its limitations, and both the patients’ wishes and economic demand require a fast stone removal, the importance of PNL has risen again. Given the correct indications and performance, PNL is an efficient treatment modality reaching stone free rates of up to 100%. When PNL is performed by an experienced urologist, complications are low and can be managed conservatively in most cases. The most important step in the performance of a PNL is the anatomically correct puncture of the kidney gaining optimal access to the stone. To reach this, a lower calyx is punctured whenever possible, under combined sonographic and fluoroscopic guidance.     

Extracorporeal shock-wave versus pneumatic ureteroscopic lithotripsy in treatment of lower ureteral calculi

Aim: To compare the efficacy and complications of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (SWL) and pneumatic ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URS) in the treatment of lower ureteral calculi. Methods: From August 1997 to June 1999, 210 patients with calculi in the distal third of the ureter were treated with SWL and the other 180 with URS. The stones were fragmented with either HB-ESWL-V lithotripter or JML-93 pneumatic lithotripter through Wolf 7.5～9.0 Fr ureteroscope. The outcome was assessed in terms of stone clearance rate, re-treatment rate and complication incidence. Results: The stone clearance rate was 78.1% with SWL and 93.3 % with URS (P<0.05). SWL had a re-treatment rate of 11.9 %, vs 2.2 % in the URS group (P<.05). URS caused ureteral perforation in 3.3% of patients, while it was 0 with SWL (P<0.05). The differences in the incidence of other complications such as infection and stricture between the two groups were insignificant. Conclusion: Though the selection of these two options depends on equip     

Clinical value of percutaneous nephrolithotomy

The introduction of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) marked a turning point in the interventional treatment of nephrolithiasis. For the first time, the minimally invasive removal of larger kidney stones, which had previously required open surgery, became possible. With the increasing use of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) during the 1980s, PNL lost clinical importance. However, since SWL has revealed its limitations, and both the patients' wishes and economic demand require a fast stone removal, the importance of PNL has risen again. Given the correct indications and performance, PNL is an efficient treatment modality reaching stone free rates of up to 100%. When PNL is performed by an experienced urologist, complications are low and can be managed conservatively in most cases. The most important step in the performance of a PNL is the anatomically correct puncture of the kidney gaining optimal access to the stone. To reach this, a lower calyx is punctured whenever possible, under combined sonographic and fluoroscopic guidance.     

Shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy for distal ureteral calculi: a prospective study

We performed a prospective, non-randomised study to determine the appropriate first-line treatment modality for distal ureteral stones. Between 2003 and 2004, a total of 124 patients with distal ureteral calculi were entered into the study (mean age 48 years, 35 women and 99 men). Sixty-two patients were treated with shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) and 62 patients with ureteroscopy (URS). The average stone size was 6.9 mm (3–33 mm) for SWL and 7.2 mm (3–30 mm) for URS. The treatment decision depended on the patients’ preference and clinical parameters (i.e. contraindications for anaesthesia). URS was performed under general anaesthesia, using semirigid 8 Fr instruments. SWL was performed under analgo-sedation using a Modulith SLX. Of patients treated with SWL, 84% had a treatment success within 7 days, 98% after URS. These results show a significant success (P=0.005) in favour of URS. The average in-patient stay after SWL was 3 days and for URS 4 days (not significant). The results show a high efficacy and a low complication rate for both modalities. The attained stone-free rate shows a significant advantage for primary URS.     

Direct pelvic access percutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of ectopic kidney stone: a case report and literature review

Abstract

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) is an effective procedure for the treatment of patients with large or complex stones. PNL is challenging in anomalous kidneys, certain patients, such as those with renal ectopia. It is unable to undergo PNL in conventional technique safely in these cases. We presented a case report of laparoscopic-assisted PNL via direct pelvic puncture in a pelvic kidney stone and discussed previous published literature. A 49-year-old man presented with right lower quadrant pain and hematuria. Intravenous pyelography and three-dimensional computerized tomography revealed an opaque 2.7?×?1.7?cm pelvis renalis stone in a right side ectopic pelvic kidney with grade III hydronephrosis. Laparoscopic-assisted tubeless PNL was performed to remove the calculus. Laparoscopic-assisted PNL as a minimally invasive therapy in ectopic kidney has many advantages. Our case showed that, in pelvic ectopic kidney with pelvic stones greater than 1.5?cm in size, laparoscopic-assisted PNL via direct pelvis puncture is a safe and effective technique.     

A practical formula to predict the stone-free rate of patients undergoing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy

ObjectivesWe studied patients who underwent extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) to investigate the factors influencing the outcome, and built a logistic regression model to estimate the stone-free rate (SFR) after SWL.Material and methodsFrom January 2013 to December 2013, we retrospectively reviewed the clinical status of 641 patients with a solitary urinary calculus who underwent SWL in our hospital. Univariate logistic regression was used to identify the factors leading to a high SFR, and significant factors were further analyzed by multivariate logistic regression. After the optimal model had been developed, we placed it on the website so others could calculate the SFR at their institutions.ResultsThe overall SFR for all patients, patients with ureteral stones, and patients with renal stones were 54.8%, 67.8%, and 46.7%, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression showed that body mass index (BMI), stone length, stone width, and stone location were the independent factors that affected the overall successful rate. Stone length was the only significant factor to predict SFR for ureteral stones. BMI, stone length, and stone width were significant SFR predictors for renal stones. A logistic regression model was designed to estimate SFR, which has a sensitivity of 77.8% and specificity of 75.5%.ConclusionBMI, stone length, stone width, and kidney and ureteral stones were all prognostic factors influencing the outcome of SWL. We built a logistic regression formula to predict the SFR, which helps urologists to select patients for SWL.