Cargando…

Complementary Ureterorenoscopy after extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in proximal ureteral stones: success and complications

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to demonstrate the effect of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy application on the success and complications of ureteroscopic lithotripsy in proximal ureter stones. METHODS: The data of 87 patients who did not respond to shock wave lithotripsy and underwent ur...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Demirelli, Erhan, Öğreden, Ercan, Tok, Doğan Sabri, Demiray, Özay, Karadayi, Mehmet, Oğuz, Ural
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Associação Médica Brasileira 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9574975/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36134836
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.20220237
_version_ 1784811220801421312
author Demirelli, Erhan
Öğreden, Ercan
Tok, Doğan Sabri
Demiray, Özay
Karadayi, Mehmet
Oğuz, Ural
author_facet Demirelli, Erhan
Öğreden, Ercan
Tok, Doğan Sabri
Demiray, Özay
Karadayi, Mehmet
Oğuz, Ural
author_sort Demirelli, Erhan
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to demonstrate the effect of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy application on the success and complications of ureteroscopic lithotripsy in proximal ureter stones. METHODS: The data of 87 patients who did not respond to shock wave lithotripsy and underwent ureteroscopic lithotripsy were retrospectively analyzed and classified as group I, and 99 patients who received ureteroscopic lithotripsy as primary treatment were classified as group II. Demographic features, response to treatment, and preoperative and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There was no difference between the two groups in terms of gender, operation times, stone sizes, and ureteroscope diameters. (p>0.05). Infective complications such as postoperative fever, pyelonephritis, and urosepsis were similar in both groups (p=0.142, p=0.291, and p=0.948). Stone migration was observed in 10 (11.5%) and 6 (6.1%) patients in groups I and II, respectively (p=0.291). Impacted stone was seen in 47 (54%) patients in group I and in 15 (15.2%) patients in group II (p<0.0001). Mucosal laceration occurred in 11 (12.6%) and 3 (3%) patients in groups I and II, respectively (p=0.028). Ureteral perforation was detected in 3 (3.4%) patients in group I and 1 (1%) patient in group II, whereas ureteral avulsion was not observed in either group (p=0.524). CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that the application of shock wave lithotripsy before ureteroscopic lithotripsy in proximal ureter stones did not affect the success. Although the results are similar in terms of postoperative infection, shock wave lithotripsy application has been found to increase the risk of stone impaction into the mucosa and ureteral laceration.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9574975
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Associação Médica Brasileira
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95749752022-10-19 Complementary Ureterorenoscopy after extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in proximal ureteral stones: success and complications Demirelli, Erhan Öğreden, Ercan Tok, Doğan Sabri Demiray, Özay Karadayi, Mehmet Oğuz, Ural Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992) Original Article OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to demonstrate the effect of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy application on the success and complications of ureteroscopic lithotripsy in proximal ureter stones. METHODS: The data of 87 patients who did not respond to shock wave lithotripsy and underwent ureteroscopic lithotripsy were retrospectively analyzed and classified as group I, and 99 patients who received ureteroscopic lithotripsy as primary treatment were classified as group II. Demographic features, response to treatment, and preoperative and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There was no difference between the two groups in terms of gender, operation times, stone sizes, and ureteroscope diameters. (p>0.05). Infective complications such as postoperative fever, pyelonephritis, and urosepsis were similar in both groups (p=0.142, p=0.291, and p=0.948). Stone migration was observed in 10 (11.5%) and 6 (6.1%) patients in groups I and II, respectively (p=0.291). Impacted stone was seen in 47 (54%) patients in group I and in 15 (15.2%) patients in group II (p<0.0001). Mucosal laceration occurred in 11 (12.6%) and 3 (3%) patients in groups I and II, respectively (p=0.028). Ureteral perforation was detected in 3 (3.4%) patients in group I and 1 (1%) patient in group II, whereas ureteral avulsion was not observed in either group (p=0.524). CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that the application of shock wave lithotripsy before ureteroscopic lithotripsy in proximal ureter stones did not affect the success. Although the results are similar in terms of postoperative infection, shock wave lithotripsy application has been found to increase the risk of stone impaction into the mucosa and ureteral laceration. Associação Médica Brasileira 2022-09-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9574975/ /pubmed/36134836 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.20220237 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Demirelli, Erhan
Öğreden, Ercan
Tok, Doğan Sabri
Demiray, Özay
Karadayi, Mehmet
Oğuz, Ural
Complementary Ureterorenoscopy after extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in proximal ureteral stones: success and complications
title Complementary Ureterorenoscopy after extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in proximal ureteral stones: success and complications
title_full Complementary Ureterorenoscopy after extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in proximal ureteral stones: success and complications
title_fullStr Complementary Ureterorenoscopy after extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in proximal ureteral stones: success and complications
title_full_unstemmed Complementary Ureterorenoscopy after extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in proximal ureteral stones: success and complications
title_short Complementary Ureterorenoscopy after extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in proximal ureteral stones: success and complications
title_sort complementary ureterorenoscopy after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in proximal ureteral stones: success and complications
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9574975/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36134836
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.20220237
work_keys_str_mv AT demirellierhan complementaryureterorenoscopyafterextracorporealshockwavelithotripsyinproximalureteralstonessuccessandcomplications
AT ogredenercan complementaryureterorenoscopyafterextracorporealshockwavelithotripsyinproximalureteralstonessuccessandcomplications
AT tokdogansabri complementaryureterorenoscopyafterextracorporealshockwavelithotripsyinproximalureteralstonessuccessandcomplications
AT demirayozay complementaryureterorenoscopyafterextracorporealshockwavelithotripsyinproximalureteralstonessuccessandcomplications
AT karadayimehmet complementaryureterorenoscopyafterextracorporealshockwavelithotripsyinproximalureteralstonessuccessandcomplications
AT oguzural complementaryureterorenoscopyafterextracorporealshockwavelithotripsyinproximalureteralstonessuccessandcomplications