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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |