British journal of urology · 1998
Treatment of mid- and lower ureteric calculi: extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy vs laser ureteroscopy. A comparison of costs, morbidity and effectiveness.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Bierkens A F, Hendrikx A J, De La Rosette J J, Stultiens G N, Beerlage H P, Arends A J, Debruyne F M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and costs of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) compared with ureteroscopy (URS) in the treatment of mid- and lower ureteric calculi.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: The records of patients treated primarily by ESWL and URS were analysed retrospectively. Treatment with ESWL included 63 patients (42 men and 21 women, mean age 52 years, range 23-78, 19 mid- and 44 lower ureteric calculi). All patients received 4000 shock waves at a mean energy setting of 18.1 kV. URS was used in 105 patients, with a 7.2 F miniscope or the 7.1 F flexible scope. Stones were fragmented with a pulsed-dye laser lithotripter at 504 nm and a power of up to 130 mJ (mean 53 mJ) using a 200 or 320 microns fibre. All ureteroscopies were performed with the patient under general (n = 17) or spinal (n = 87) anaesthesia in a mean treatment duration of 34 min. Stones were located in the mid-ureter in 24 patients and in the lower ureter in 80. The outcome was assessed by stone-free rates, re-treatment rates, time to become stone-free, complication and costs.
RESULTS: ESWL for mid- and lower ureteric calculi resulted in a success rate of 90% and 81%, respectively, compared with 96% and 99% for URS. However, patients treated with URS were stone-free within 2 days, whereas patients in the ESWL group required up to 4 months. The best results for ESWL were achieved with stones of < 50 mm2. The costs of URS were higher than those for ESWL.
CONCLUSIONS: ESWL provides a noninvasive, simple and safe option for the management of mid- and lower ureteric calculi, provided that the stones are < 50 mm2; larger stones are best treated by URS.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: The records of patients treated primarily by ESWL and URS were analysed retrospectively. Treatment with ESWL included 63 patients (42 men and 21 women, mean age 52 years, range 23-78, 19 mid- and 44 lower ureteric calculi). All patients received 4000 shock waves at a mean energy setting of 18.1 kV. URS was used in 105 patients, with a 7.2 F miniscope or the 7.1 F flexible scope. Stones were fragmented with a pulsed-dye laser lithotripter at 504 nm and a power of up to 130 mJ (mean 53 mJ) using a 200 or 320 microns fibre. All ureteroscopies were performed with the patient under general (n = 17) or spinal (n = 87) anaesthesia in a mean treatment duration of 34 min. Stones were located in the mid-ureter in 24 patients and in the lower ureter in 80. The outcome was assessed by stone-free rates, re-treatment rates, time to become stone-free, complication and costs.
RESULTS: ESWL for mid- and lower ureteric calculi resulted in a success rate of 90% and 81%, respectively, compared with 96% and 99% for URS. However, patients treated with URS were stone-free within 2 days, whereas patients in the ESWL group required up to 4 months. The best results for ESWL were achieved with stones of < 50 mm2. The costs of URS were higher than those for ESWL.
CONCLUSIONS: ESWL provides a noninvasive, simple and safe option for the management of mid- and lower ureteric calculi, provided that the stones are < 50 mm2; larger stones are best treated by URS.