Shock wave lithotripsy versus endoscopic cystolitholapaxy in the management of patients presenting with calcular acute urinary retention: a randomised controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in treatment of bladder and urethral stones was not precisely determined. The objective of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of SWL versus visual cystolitholapaxy in the management of calcular acute urine retention.

METHODS

From March 2015 to February 2017, a randomised controlled study was conducted on 100 patients for whom urethral catheter fixed for acute retention of urine due to urethral or vesical radio-opaque stone(s) ≤ 2 cm. Patients were randomised to either SWL group (n = 50) or visual cystolitholapaxy (endoscopy group) (n = 50).

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences between the pre-operative parameters of both groups were found. The mean stone diameter was 12.2 ± 3 mm and 12.2 ± 3.2 mm in SWL and endoscopy groups, respectively (p value = 0.4). The overall success rates of SWL group were 94% (47 of 50 patients) and endoscopy group were 98% (49 of 50 patients). SWL failed in 3 patients (6%); these 3 patients underwent cystolitholapaxy and were rendered free of stones. Intra-operative and post-operative complications were comparable between both groups (p value = 0.5 and 1, respectively). One patient had bladder perforation in the endoscopy group and was managed conservatively.

CONCLUSIONS

SWL mono-therapy is safe, non-invasive and as effective as visual cystolitholapaxy in management of patients presenting with acute urine retention by vesical or urethral stones 2 cm or less and could be useful for patients unwilling/unfit for general anaesthesia.