Cargando…

Immediate versus delayed shockwave lithotripsy for inaccessible stones after uncomplicated percutaneous nephrolithotomy

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of immediate versus delayed shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) for inaccessible stones after uncomplicated percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between December 2011 and June 2014, patients with residual inaccessible stones after uncompli...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Desoky, Esam A.E., Fawzi, Amr M., Sakr, Ahmed, Eliwa, Ahmed, El Sayed, Ehab R., El Sayed, Diab, Shahin, Asharf M.S., Salem, Emad A., Kamel, Hussien M., Shabana, Waleed, Kamel, Mostafa
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5329696/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28275515
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2016.11.002
_version_ 1782511106007236608
author Desoky, Esam A.E.
Fawzi, Amr M.
Sakr, Ahmed
Eliwa, Ahmed
El Sayed, Ehab R.
El Sayed, Diab
Shahin, Asharf M.S.
Salem, Emad A.
Kamel, Hussien M.
Shabana, Waleed
Kamel, Mostafa
author_facet Desoky, Esam A.E.
Fawzi, Amr M.
Sakr, Ahmed
Eliwa, Ahmed
El Sayed, Ehab R.
El Sayed, Diab
Shahin, Asharf M.S.
Salem, Emad A.
Kamel, Hussien M.
Shabana, Waleed
Kamel, Mostafa
author_sort Desoky, Esam A.E.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of immediate versus delayed shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) for inaccessible stones after uncomplicated percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between December 2011 and June 2014, patients with residual inaccessible stones after uncomplicated PCNL were prospectively randomised into two treatment groups; Group I, immediate SWL and Group II, delayed SWL at 1 week after PCNL. Patients with residual stones of ⩾1.5 cm, a stone density of >1000 Hounsfield units and body mass index of >40 kg/m(2) were excluded from the study. The following data were reported: patients’ demographics, stone characteristics after PCNL, hospital stay, perioperative complications, stent duration, and stone-free rate (SFR). RESULTS: In all, 84 patients (51 males and 33 females) with mean (SD) age of 39 (8.5) years were included in the study. Group I included 44 patients, whilst Group II included 40 patients. There was no statistically significant difference amongst the groups for patients’ demographics, stone characteristics, and perioperative complications. The hospital stay was significantly shorter in Group I, at a mean (SD) of 34 (3.7) vs 45 (2.9) h (P < 0.001). The duration of ureteric stenting was significantly lower in Group I as compared to Group II, at a mean (SD) of 12 (4.2) vs 25 (3.5) days (P < 0.001). The SFR was 93.2% and 95% in Groups I and II, respectively (P = 0.9). CONCLUSIONS: Immediate SWL after PCNL is as effective and safe as delayed SWL with a lesser hospital stay and duration of ureteric stenting.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5329696
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53296962017-03-08 Immediate versus delayed shockwave lithotripsy for inaccessible stones after uncomplicated percutaneous nephrolithotomy Desoky, Esam A.E. Fawzi, Amr M. Sakr, Ahmed Eliwa, Ahmed El Sayed, Ehab R. El Sayed, Diab Shahin, Asharf M.S. Salem, Emad A. Kamel, Hussien M. Shabana, Waleed Kamel, Mostafa Arab J Urol Original Article OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of immediate versus delayed shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) for inaccessible stones after uncomplicated percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between December 2011 and June 2014, patients with residual inaccessible stones after uncomplicated PCNL were prospectively randomised into two treatment groups; Group I, immediate SWL and Group II, delayed SWL at 1 week after PCNL. Patients with residual stones of ⩾1.5 cm, a stone density of >1000 Hounsfield units and body mass index of >40 kg/m(2) were excluded from the study. The following data were reported: patients’ demographics, stone characteristics after PCNL, hospital stay, perioperative complications, stent duration, and stone-free rate (SFR). RESULTS: In all, 84 patients (51 males and 33 females) with mean (SD) age of 39 (8.5) years were included in the study. Group I included 44 patients, whilst Group II included 40 patients. There was no statistically significant difference amongst the groups for patients’ demographics, stone characteristics, and perioperative complications. The hospital stay was significantly shorter in Group I, at a mean (SD) of 34 (3.7) vs 45 (2.9) h (P < 0.001). The duration of ureteric stenting was significantly lower in Group I as compared to Group II, at a mean (SD) of 12 (4.2) vs 25 (3.5) days (P < 0.001). The SFR was 93.2% and 95% in Groups I and II, respectively (P = 0.9). CONCLUSIONS: Immediate SWL after PCNL is as effective and safe as delayed SWL with a lesser hospital stay and duration of ureteric stenting. Elsevier 2016-12-28 /pmc/articles/PMC5329696/ /pubmed/28275515 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2016.11.002 Text en © 2016 Arab Association of Urology. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Desoky, Esam A.E.
Fawzi, Amr M.
Sakr, Ahmed
Eliwa, Ahmed
El Sayed, Ehab R.
El Sayed, Diab
Shahin, Asharf M.S.
Salem, Emad A.
Kamel, Hussien M.
Shabana, Waleed
Kamel, Mostafa
Immediate versus delayed shockwave lithotripsy for inaccessible stones after uncomplicated percutaneous nephrolithotomy
title Immediate versus delayed shockwave lithotripsy for inaccessible stones after uncomplicated percutaneous nephrolithotomy
title_full Immediate versus delayed shockwave lithotripsy for inaccessible stones after uncomplicated percutaneous nephrolithotomy
title_fullStr Immediate versus delayed shockwave lithotripsy for inaccessible stones after uncomplicated percutaneous nephrolithotomy
title_full_unstemmed Immediate versus delayed shockwave lithotripsy for inaccessible stones after uncomplicated percutaneous nephrolithotomy
title_short Immediate versus delayed shockwave lithotripsy for inaccessible stones after uncomplicated percutaneous nephrolithotomy
title_sort immediate versus delayed shockwave lithotripsy for inaccessible stones after uncomplicated percutaneous nephrolithotomy
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5329696/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28275515
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2016.11.002
work_keys_str_mv AT desokyesamae immediateversusdelayedshockwavelithotripsyforinaccessiblestonesafteruncomplicatedpercutaneousnephrolithotomy
AT fawziamrm immediateversusdelayedshockwavelithotripsyforinaccessiblestonesafteruncomplicatedpercutaneousnephrolithotomy
AT sakrahmed immediateversusdelayedshockwavelithotripsyforinaccessiblestonesafteruncomplicatedpercutaneousnephrolithotomy
AT eliwaahmed immediateversusdelayedshockwavelithotripsyforinaccessiblestonesafteruncomplicatedpercutaneousnephrolithotomy
AT elsayedehabr immediateversusdelayedshockwavelithotripsyforinaccessiblestonesafteruncomplicatedpercutaneousnephrolithotomy
AT elsayeddiab immediateversusdelayedshockwavelithotripsyforinaccessiblestonesafteruncomplicatedpercutaneousnephrolithotomy
AT shahinasharfms immediateversusdelayedshockwavelithotripsyforinaccessiblestonesafteruncomplicatedpercutaneousnephrolithotomy
AT salememada immediateversusdelayedshockwavelithotripsyforinaccessiblestonesafteruncomplicatedpercutaneousnephrolithotomy
AT kamelhussienm immediateversusdelayedshockwavelithotripsyforinaccessiblestonesafteruncomplicatedpercutaneousnephrolithotomy
AT shabanawaleed immediateversusdelayedshockwavelithotripsyforinaccessiblestonesafteruncomplicatedpercutaneousnephrolithotomy
AT kamelmostafa immediateversusdelayedshockwavelithotripsyforinaccessiblestonesafteruncomplicatedpercutaneousnephrolithotomy