Cargando…

Does ureteral stenting matter for stone size? A retrospectıve analyses of 1361 extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy patients

INTRODUCTION: The aim of our study was to determine the efficacy of ureteral stents for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) treatment of pelvis renalis stones and to compare the results and complications in stented and non-stented patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between 1995 and 2011, 1361 p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ozkan, Burak, Dogan, Cagatay, Can, Gulce Ecem, Tansu, Nejat, Erozencı, Ahmet, Onal, Bulent
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Polish Urological Association 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4643708/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26568882
http://dx.doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2015.611
_version_ 1782400551707738112
author Ozkan, Burak
Dogan, Cagatay
Can, Gulce Ecem
Tansu, Nejat
Erozencı, Ahmet
Onal, Bulent
author_facet Ozkan, Burak
Dogan, Cagatay
Can, Gulce Ecem
Tansu, Nejat
Erozencı, Ahmet
Onal, Bulent
author_sort Ozkan, Burak
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The aim of our study was to determine the efficacy of ureteral stents for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) treatment of pelvis renalis stones and to compare the results and complications in stented and non-stented patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between 1995 and 2011, 1361 patients with pelvis renalis stones were treated with SWL. Patients were subdivided into three groups according to stone burden: ≤1 cm(2) (group 1; n = 514), 1.1 to 2 cm(2) (group 2; n = 530) and >2 cm(2) (group 3; n = 317). Each group was divided into subgroups of patients who did and did not undergo ureteral stent implantation before SWL treatment. The efficacy of treatment was evaluated by determining the effectiveness quotient (EQ). Statistical analysis was performed by chi-square, Fisher's exact and Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: Of the 514, 530 and 317 patients in groups 1, 2 and 3 respectively, 30 (6%), 44 (8%) and 104 (33%) patients underwent auxiliary stent implantation. Steinstrasse rates did not differ significantly between stented and non-stented patients in each group. The EQ was calculated as 62%, 33% and 70% respectively in non-stented, stented and totally for group 1. This ratio calculated as 58%, 25% and 63% for group 2 and 62%, 26% and 47% for group 3. Stone-free rates were significantly higher for non-stented than for stented patients in groups 2 and 3. CONCLUSIONS: Stone free rates are significantly higher in non-stented than in stented patients with pelvis renalis stones >1 cm(2), whereas steinstrasse rates are not affected.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4643708
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Polish Urological Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46437082015-11-13 Does ureteral stenting matter for stone size? A retrospectıve analyses of 1361 extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy patients Ozkan, Burak Dogan, Cagatay Can, Gulce Ecem Tansu, Nejat Erozencı, Ahmet Onal, Bulent Cent European J Urol Original Paper INTRODUCTION: The aim of our study was to determine the efficacy of ureteral stents for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) treatment of pelvis renalis stones and to compare the results and complications in stented and non-stented patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between 1995 and 2011, 1361 patients with pelvis renalis stones were treated with SWL. Patients were subdivided into three groups according to stone burden: ≤1 cm(2) (group 1; n = 514), 1.1 to 2 cm(2) (group 2; n = 530) and >2 cm(2) (group 3; n = 317). Each group was divided into subgroups of patients who did and did not undergo ureteral stent implantation before SWL treatment. The efficacy of treatment was evaluated by determining the effectiveness quotient (EQ). Statistical analysis was performed by chi-square, Fisher's exact and Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: Of the 514, 530 and 317 patients in groups 1, 2 and 3 respectively, 30 (6%), 44 (8%) and 104 (33%) patients underwent auxiliary stent implantation. Steinstrasse rates did not differ significantly between stented and non-stented patients in each group. The EQ was calculated as 62%, 33% and 70% respectively in non-stented, stented and totally for group 1. This ratio calculated as 58%, 25% and 63% for group 2 and 62%, 26% and 47% for group 3. Stone-free rates were significantly higher for non-stented than for stented patients in groups 2 and 3. CONCLUSIONS: Stone free rates are significantly higher in non-stented than in stented patients with pelvis renalis stones >1 cm(2), whereas steinstrasse rates are not affected. Polish Urological Association 2015-10-15 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4643708/ /pubmed/26568882 http://dx.doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2015.611 Text en Copyright by Polish Urological Association http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License, permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Ozkan, Burak
Dogan, Cagatay
Can, Gulce Ecem
Tansu, Nejat
Erozencı, Ahmet
Onal, Bulent
Does ureteral stenting matter for stone size? A retrospectıve analyses of 1361 extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy patients
title Does ureteral stenting matter for stone size? A retrospectıve analyses of 1361 extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy patients
title_full Does ureteral stenting matter for stone size? A retrospectıve analyses of 1361 extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy patients
title_fullStr Does ureteral stenting matter for stone size? A retrospectıve analyses of 1361 extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy patients
title_full_unstemmed Does ureteral stenting matter for stone size? A retrospectıve analyses of 1361 extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy patients
title_short Does ureteral stenting matter for stone size? A retrospectıve analyses of 1361 extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy patients
title_sort does ureteral stenting matter for stone size? a retrospectıve analyses of 1361 extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy patients
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4643708/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26568882
http://dx.doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2015.611
work_keys_str_mv AT ozkanburak doesureteralstentingmatterforstonesizearetrospectıveanalysesof1361extracorporealshockwavelithotripsypatients
AT dogancagatay doesureteralstentingmatterforstonesizearetrospectıveanalysesof1361extracorporealshockwavelithotripsypatients
AT cangulceecem doesureteralstentingmatterforstonesizearetrospectıveanalysesof1361extracorporealshockwavelithotripsypatients
AT tansunejat doesureteralstentingmatterforstonesizearetrospectıveanalysesof1361extracorporealshockwavelithotripsypatients
AT erozencıahmet doesureteralstentingmatterforstonesizearetrospectıveanalysesof1361extracorporealshockwavelithotripsypatients
AT onalbulent doesureteralstentingmatterforstonesizearetrospectıveanalysesof1361extracorporealshockwavelithotripsypatients