Cargando…
A Comparative Study of Stone Re-Treatment after Lithotripsy
The high recurrence rate has always been a problem associated with urolithiasis. This study aimed to explore the effectiveness of single interventions, combined therapies, and surgical and nonsurgical interventions. Herein, three lithotripsy procedures—extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), p...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9780782/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36556495 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/life12122130 |
_version_ | 1784856913233575936 |
---|---|
author | Chiou, Yueh-Er Chung, Chi-Hsiang Chien, Wu-Chien Tsay, Pei-Kwei Kan, Hung-Cheng Weng, Wen-Hui |
author_facet | Chiou, Yueh-Er Chung, Chi-Hsiang Chien, Wu-Chien Tsay, Pei-Kwei Kan, Hung-Cheng Weng, Wen-Hui |
author_sort | Chiou, Yueh-Er |
collection | PubMed |
description | The high recurrence rate has always been a problem associated with urolithiasis. This study aimed to explore the effectiveness of single interventions, combined therapies, and surgical and nonsurgical interventions. Herein, three lithotripsy procedures—extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), and ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URSL)—were assessed and a retrospective cohort was selected in order to further analyze the association with several risk factors. Firstly, a population-based cohort from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) from 1997 to 2010 was selected. In this study, 350 lithotripsy patients who underwent re-treatment were followed up for at least six years to compare re-treatment rates, with 1400 patients without any lithotripsy treatment being used as the comparison cohort. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was applied. Our results indicate that the risk of repeat urolithiasis treatment was 1.71-fold higher in patients that received lithotripsy when compared to patients that were not treated with lithotripsy (hazard ratio (HR) 1.71; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.427–2.048; p < 0.001). Furthermore, a high percentage of repeated treatment was observed in the ESWL group (HR 1.60; 95% CI = 1.292–1.978; p < 0.001). Similarly, the PCNL group was also independently associated with a high chance of repeated treatment (HR 2.32; 95% CI = 1.616–3.329; p < 0.001). Furthermore, age, season, level of care, and Charlson comorbidities index (CCI) should always be taken into consideration as effect factors that are highly correlated with repeated treatment rates. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9780782 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97807822022-12-24 A Comparative Study of Stone Re-Treatment after Lithotripsy Chiou, Yueh-Er Chung, Chi-Hsiang Chien, Wu-Chien Tsay, Pei-Kwei Kan, Hung-Cheng Weng, Wen-Hui Life (Basel) Article The high recurrence rate has always been a problem associated with urolithiasis. This study aimed to explore the effectiveness of single interventions, combined therapies, and surgical and nonsurgical interventions. Herein, three lithotripsy procedures—extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), and ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URSL)—were assessed and a retrospective cohort was selected in order to further analyze the association with several risk factors. Firstly, a population-based cohort from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) from 1997 to 2010 was selected. In this study, 350 lithotripsy patients who underwent re-treatment were followed up for at least six years to compare re-treatment rates, with 1400 patients without any lithotripsy treatment being used as the comparison cohort. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was applied. Our results indicate that the risk of repeat urolithiasis treatment was 1.71-fold higher in patients that received lithotripsy when compared to patients that were not treated with lithotripsy (hazard ratio (HR) 1.71; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.427–2.048; p < 0.001). Furthermore, a high percentage of repeated treatment was observed in the ESWL group (HR 1.60; 95% CI = 1.292–1.978; p < 0.001). Similarly, the PCNL group was also independently associated with a high chance of repeated treatment (HR 2.32; 95% CI = 1.616–3.329; p < 0.001). Furthermore, age, season, level of care, and Charlson comorbidities index (CCI) should always be taken into consideration as effect factors that are highly correlated with repeated treatment rates. MDPI 2022-12-16 /pmc/articles/PMC9780782/ /pubmed/36556495 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/life12122130 Text en © 2022 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 | Article Chiou, Yueh-Er Chung, Chi-Hsiang Chien, Wu-Chien Tsay, Pei-Kwei Kan, Hung-Cheng Weng, Wen-Hui A Comparative Study of Stone Re-Treatment after Lithotripsy |
title | A Comparative Study of Stone Re-Treatment after Lithotripsy |
title_full | A Comparative Study of Stone Re-Treatment after Lithotripsy |
title_fullStr | A Comparative Study of Stone Re-Treatment after Lithotripsy |
title_full_unstemmed | A Comparative Study of Stone Re-Treatment after Lithotripsy |
title_short | A Comparative Study of Stone Re-Treatment after Lithotripsy |
title_sort | comparative study of stone re-treatment after lithotripsy |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9780782/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36556495 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/life12122130 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chiouyueher acomparativestudyofstoneretreatmentafterlithotripsy AT chungchihsiang acomparativestudyofstoneretreatmentafterlithotripsy AT chienwuchien acomparativestudyofstoneretreatmentafterlithotripsy AT tsaypeikwei acomparativestudyofstoneretreatmentafterlithotripsy AT kanhungcheng acomparativestudyofstoneretreatmentafterlithotripsy AT wengwenhui acomparativestudyofstoneretreatmentafterlithotripsy AT chiouyueher comparativestudyofstoneretreatmentafterlithotripsy AT chungchihsiang comparativestudyofstoneretreatmentafterlithotripsy AT chienwuchien comparativestudyofstoneretreatmentafterlithotripsy AT tsaypeikwei comparativestudyofstoneretreatmentafterlithotripsy AT kanhungcheng comparativestudyofstoneretreatmentafterlithotripsy AT wengwenhui comparativestudyofstoneretreatmentafterlithotripsy |