The Journal of urology · 2006
Is pre-shock wave lithotripsy stenting necessary for ureteral stones with moderate or severe hydronephrosis?
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
El-Assmy Ahmed, El-Nahas Ahmed R, Sheir Khaled Z
Аннотация
PURPOSE: We performed a prospective, randomized clinical trial to evaluate the outcome of ureteral stents for solitary ureteral stones 2 cm or less in moderately or severely obstructed systems using shock wave lithotripsy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2001 and 2004, 186 patients who met study criteria were randomized into 2 groups. Group 1 received a pre-shock wave lithotripsy 6Fr Double-J stent and group 2 had no stent. Patients were treated with a Dornier MFL 5000 lithotripter. Results were compared in terms of clearance rates, number of shock waves and sessions, irritative voiding symptoms, incidence of complications and secondary interventions. Failure was defined as the need for additional procedure(s) for stone extraction.
RESULTS: Overall 164 patients (88.2%) became stone-free after shock wave lithotripsy. Complete stone fragmentation was achieved after 1 to 3 and more than 3 session in 108 (58.1%), 30 (16.1%), 13 (7%) and 14 patients (7.5%), respectively. Ureteral stent insertion did not affect the stone-free rate, which was 84.9% and 91.4% in groups 1 and 2, respectively (p = 0.25). There was no statistical difference in the re-treatment rate, flank pain or temperature in the 2 groups. However, all patients in the stented group significantly complained of side effects attributable to the stent, including dysuria, suprapubic pain, hematuria, pyuria and positive urinary culture.
CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment stenting provides no advantage over in situ shock wave lithotripsy for significantly obstructing ureteral calculi. Shock wave lithotripsy is reasonable initial therapy for ureteral stones 2 cm or less that cause moderate or severe hydronephrosis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2001 and 2004, 186 patients who met study criteria were randomized into 2 groups. Group 1 received a pre-shock wave lithotripsy 6Fr Double-J stent and group 2 had no stent. Patients were treated with a Dornier MFL 5000 lithotripter. Results were compared in terms of clearance rates, number of shock waves and sessions, irritative voiding symptoms, incidence of complications and secondary interventions. Failure was defined as the need for additional procedure(s) for stone extraction.
RESULTS: Overall 164 patients (88.2%) became stone-free after shock wave lithotripsy. Complete stone fragmentation was achieved after 1 to 3 and more than 3 session in 108 (58.1%), 30 (16.1%), 13 (7%) and 14 patients (7.5%), respectively. Ureteral stent insertion did not affect the stone-free rate, which was 84.9% and 91.4% in groups 1 and 2, respectively (p = 0.25). There was no statistical difference in the re-treatment rate, flank pain or temperature in the 2 groups. However, all patients in the stented group significantly complained of side effects attributable to the stent, including dysuria, suprapubic pain, hematuria, pyuria and positive urinary culture.
CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment stenting provides no advantage over in situ shock wave lithotripsy for significantly obstructing ureteral calculi. Shock wave lithotripsy is reasonable initial therapy for ureteral stones 2 cm or less that cause moderate or severe hydronephrosis.