Cargando…
Shockwave Lithotripsy for De-Novo Urolithiasis after Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review of the Literature
Background: Allograft urolithiasis is an uncommon, challenging, and potentially dangerous clinical problem. Treatment of allograft stones includes external shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), flexible ureteroscopy and lasertripsy (fURSL), or percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). A gap in the literature and...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10342763/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37445423 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12134389 |
_version_ | 1785072577060798464 |
---|---|
author | Cerrato, Clara Jahrreiss, Victoria Nedbal, Carlotta Ripa, Francesco De Marco, Vincenzo Monga, Manoj Pietropaolo, Amelia Somani, Bhaskar |
author_facet | Cerrato, Clara Jahrreiss, Victoria Nedbal, Carlotta Ripa, Francesco De Marco, Vincenzo Monga, Manoj Pietropaolo, Amelia Somani, Bhaskar |
author_sort | Cerrato, Clara |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: Allograft urolithiasis is an uncommon, challenging, and potentially dangerous clinical problem. Treatment of allograft stones includes external shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), flexible ureteroscopy and lasertripsy (fURSL), or percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). A gap in the literature and guidelines exists regarding the treatment of patients in this setting. The aim of this systematic review was to collect preoperative and treatment characteristics and evaluate the outcomes of post-transplant SWL for stone disease. Methods: A systematic search in the literature was performed, including articles up to March 2023. Only original English articles were selected. Results: Eight articles (81 patients) were included in the review. Patients were mainly male, with a mean age of 41.9 years (±7.07). The mean stone size was 13.18 mm (±2.28 mm). Stones were predominantly located in the kidney (n = 18, 62%). The overall stone-free rate and complication rates were 81% (range: 50–100%) and 17.2% (14/81), respectively, with only one major complication reported. A pre-operative drainage was placed in eleven (13.5%) patients. Five patients (6.71%) required a second treatment for residual fragments. Conclusions: SWL is a safe and effective option to treat de novo stones after transplantation. Larger studies are needed to better address allograft urolithiasis management. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10342763 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103427632023-07-14 Shockwave Lithotripsy for De-Novo Urolithiasis after Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review of the Literature Cerrato, Clara Jahrreiss, Victoria Nedbal, Carlotta Ripa, Francesco De Marco, Vincenzo Monga, Manoj Pietropaolo, Amelia Somani, Bhaskar J Clin Med Review Background: Allograft urolithiasis is an uncommon, challenging, and potentially dangerous clinical problem. Treatment of allograft stones includes external shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), flexible ureteroscopy and lasertripsy (fURSL), or percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). A gap in the literature and guidelines exists regarding the treatment of patients in this setting. The aim of this systematic review was to collect preoperative and treatment characteristics and evaluate the outcomes of post-transplant SWL for stone disease. Methods: A systematic search in the literature was performed, including articles up to March 2023. Only original English articles were selected. Results: Eight articles (81 patients) were included in the review. Patients were mainly male, with a mean age of 41.9 years (±7.07). The mean stone size was 13.18 mm (±2.28 mm). Stones were predominantly located in the kidney (n = 18, 62%). The overall stone-free rate and complication rates were 81% (range: 50–100%) and 17.2% (14/81), respectively, with only one major complication reported. A pre-operative drainage was placed in eleven (13.5%) patients. Five patients (6.71%) required a second treatment for residual fragments. Conclusions: SWL is a safe and effective option to treat de novo stones after transplantation. Larger studies are needed to better address allograft urolithiasis management. MDPI 2023-06-29 /pmc/articles/PMC10342763/ /pubmed/37445423 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12134389 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Review Cerrato, Clara Jahrreiss, Victoria Nedbal, Carlotta Ripa, Francesco De Marco, Vincenzo Monga, Manoj Pietropaolo, Amelia Somani, Bhaskar Shockwave Lithotripsy for De-Novo Urolithiasis after Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review of the Literature |
title | Shockwave Lithotripsy for De-Novo Urolithiasis after Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review of the Literature |
title_full | Shockwave Lithotripsy for De-Novo Urolithiasis after Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review of the Literature |
title_fullStr | Shockwave Lithotripsy for De-Novo Urolithiasis after Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review of the Literature |
title_full_unstemmed | Shockwave Lithotripsy for De-Novo Urolithiasis after Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review of the Literature |
title_short | Shockwave Lithotripsy for De-Novo Urolithiasis after Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review of the Literature |
title_sort | shockwave lithotripsy for de-novo urolithiasis after kidney transplantation: a systematic review of the literature |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10342763/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37445423 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12134389 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cerratoclara shockwavelithotripsyfordenovourolithiasisafterkidneytransplantationasystematicreviewoftheliterature AT jahrreissvictoria shockwavelithotripsyfordenovourolithiasisafterkidneytransplantationasystematicreviewoftheliterature AT nedbalcarlotta shockwavelithotripsyfordenovourolithiasisafterkidneytransplantationasystematicreviewoftheliterature AT ripafrancesco shockwavelithotripsyfordenovourolithiasisafterkidneytransplantationasystematicreviewoftheliterature AT demarcovincenzo shockwavelithotripsyfordenovourolithiasisafterkidneytransplantationasystematicreviewoftheliterature AT mongamanoj shockwavelithotripsyfordenovourolithiasisafterkidneytransplantationasystematicreviewoftheliterature AT pietropaoloamelia shockwavelithotripsyfordenovourolithiasisafterkidneytransplantationasystematicreviewoftheliterature AT somanibhaskar shockwavelithotripsyfordenovourolithiasisafterkidneytransplantationasystematicreviewoftheliterature |