Javascript must be enabled to continue!
COMPARISON OF THE SUCCESS OF EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCK WAVE LITHOTRIPSY (ESWL) WITH AND WITHOUT DJ STENTING IN PROXIMAL URETERIC STONE
View through CrossRef
BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: There is disagreement in the use of ureteral double-J stent before the extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), although most of the urologists suggest using stent in shock wave lithotripsy technique for stones bigger than 20mm, for preventing the risk of developing steinstrasse. To compare the success of ESWL with and without DJ stenting in proximal ureteric stone. METHODOLOGY: A total of 60 patients form both genders, between 15 to 55 years of age, with a single proximal ureteric stone, were included. Patients with solitary functioning kidney, multiple stones, pregnancy, pyonephrosis and sepsis were excluded. In Group-A, ESWL without DJ stenting was completed while in Group-B, ESWL with DJ stent placement was done. In all patients, at least 4 sessions were done fortnightly. Patients were followed regularly and final success was noted after one month of completion of ESWL sessions.
RESULTS: The mean age was 36.85 ± 8.61 years. From 60 patients, 29 (48.33%) were men and 231 (51.67%) were women.Mean body mass index (BMI) was 28.30±2.20 kg/m . The average size of the stone was 12.47 ± 2.57 mm. Success (according to stone removal) of Group-A (ESWL without DJS) was seen in 26 (86.67%) patients while in Group-B (ESWL with DJS) was seen in 16 (53.33%) patients with P-value of 0.005.
CONCLUSION: This study concluded that success (in terms of stone clearance) of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) without DJ stenting is higher compared to with DJ stenting in upper ureteric stone.
University Medical and Dental College Faisalabad
Title: COMPARISON OF THE SUCCESS OF EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCK WAVE LITHOTRIPSY (ESWL) WITH AND WITHOUT DJ STENTING IN PROXIMAL URETERIC STONE
Description:
BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: There is disagreement in the use of ureteral double-J stent before the extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), although most of the urologists suggest using stent in shock wave lithotripsy technique for stones bigger than 20mm, for preventing the risk of developing steinstrasse.
To compare the success of ESWL with and without DJ stenting in proximal ureteric stone.
METHODOLOGY: A total of 60 patients form both genders, between 15 to 55 years of age, with a single proximal ureteric stone, were included.
Patients with solitary functioning kidney, multiple stones, pregnancy, pyonephrosis and sepsis were excluded.
In Group-A, ESWL without DJ stenting was completed while in Group-B, ESWL with DJ stent placement was done.
In all patients, at least 4 sessions were done fortnightly.
Patients were followed regularly and final success was noted after one month of completion of ESWL sessions.
RESULTS: The mean age was 36.
85 ± 8.
61 years.
From 60 patients, 29 (48.
33%) were men and 231 (51.
67%) were women.
Mean body mass index (BMI) was 28.
30±2.
20 kg/m .
The average size of the stone was 12.
47 ± 2.
57 mm.
Success (according to stone removal) of Group-A (ESWL without DJS) was seen in 26 (86.
67%) patients while in Group-B (ESWL with DJS) was seen in 16 (53.
33%) patients with P-value of 0.
005.
CONCLUSION: This study concluded that success (in terms of stone clearance) of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) without DJ stenting is higher compared to with DJ stenting in upper ureteric stone.
Related Results
Outcome Of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (Eswl) Of Lower Ureteric Stones
Outcome Of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (Eswl) Of Lower Ureteric Stones
Urolithiasis is a prevailing urological condition, with ureteric stones affecting around 22% of cases, mostly causing severe pain and other complications. Surveillance, medical the...
Stented and Non-Stented Techniques in Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithoplasty for Upper Ureteral Stones<b></b>
Stented and Non-Stented Techniques in Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithoplasty for Upper Ureteral Stones<b></b>
Background and Objectives: Extra corporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is a non-invasive technique for treating patients with renal calculi. It fragments the stone to smaller siz...
The effect of skin-to-stone distance on success in renal pelvis stones treated with ESWL
The effect of skin-to-stone distance on success in renal pelvis stones treated with ESWL
Our study aimed to investigate the effect of stone load, skin-to-stone distance, and stone density Hounsfield Unit (HU) measured in unenhanced computed tomography on the success of...
Factors Affecting the Outcome of Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy in Urinary Stone Treatment
Factors Affecting the Outcome of Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy in Urinary Stone Treatment
Background and aim: The recurrence of urinary stones occurs in two thirds of patients within a 20-year period, making urinary stones a common pathology. Among urology pathologies, ...
Single Centre Experience of Slow Versus Fast Rate ESWL in Urolithiasis
Single Centre Experience of Slow Versus Fast Rate ESWL in Urolithiasis
Aim: To compare the success of slow rate with fast rate extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the treatment of urolithiasis. Study design: Randomized controlled trial Place &...
LASER LITHOTRIPSY VS PNEUMATIC LITHOTRIPSY IN URETERIC STONE REMOVAL: A CONTROLLED TRIAL
LASER LITHOTRIPSY VS PNEUMATIC LITHOTRIPSY IN URETERIC STONE REMOVAL: A CONTROLLED TRIAL
Ureteric stones represent a significant proportion of urolithiasis cases and are a common cause of emergency department visits worldwide. Minimally invasive endourological techniqu...
The Management of Lower Ureteric Stones: A Comparison of Silodosin and Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy with Regard to Efficacy and Safety
The Management of Lower Ureteric Stones: A Comparison of Silodosin and Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy with Regard to Efficacy and Safety
Objectives: To compare the efficacy and safety of silodosin versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for the management of lower ureteric stone.
Study design: Randomized contr...
STONE FREE RATES OF KIDNEY STONE WAS LOWER THAN THE ONE OF URETER STONE PATIENTS MANAGED BY ESWL AND THE ONE OF URETER STONE MANAGED BY URETEROLITHOTRIPSY
STONE FREE RATES OF KIDNEY STONE WAS LOWER THAN THE ONE OF URETER STONE PATIENTS MANAGED BY ESWL AND THE ONE OF URETER STONE MANAGED BY URETEROLITHOTRIPSY
Objective: To evaluate the stone free rates of kidney and ureter stone patients managed by Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy (ESWL), and the ureter stone free rate managed by ur...

