Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Ureteroscopic Laser Lithotripsy versus Ballistic Lithotripsy for Treatment of Ureteric Stones: A Prospective Comparative Study
View through CrossRef
<i>Objectives:</i> This study was undertaken to compare the results of laser (Ho:YAG) and pneumatic (ballistic) intracorporeal lithotripsy for ureteric calculi in terms of efficacy, safety and complications. <i>Methods:</i> 55 patients having ureteric calculus were randomly allocated into pneumatic lithotripsy (PL) and laser lithotripsy (LL) groups. Swiss lithoclast was used for PL (3 atm pressure and 12 Hz frequency) and the VersaPulse PowerSuite was used for LL. Appropriate statistical tests were applied. <i>Results:</i> 30 patients (34 stones) were treated with LL and 25 patients (25 stones) with PL. Both groups were comparable in profile. Mean lithotripsy time was 24.03 ± 9.51 min in the LL group and 19.80 ± 4.44 min in the PL group (p = 0.027). The immediate stone clearance rate was higher in the LL group (p = 0.001), but it was comparable at 4 weeks (p = 0.097). Stone migration occurred in 16% of cases in the PL group. No major complication was observed in either group. <i>Conclusions:</i> We conclude that both laser and pneumatic energies are effective and safe for intracorporeal lithotripsy. Laser lithotripsy takes more time but provides earlier stone-free status.
Title: Ureteroscopic Laser Lithotripsy versus Ballistic Lithotripsy for Treatment of Ureteric Stones: A Prospective Comparative Study
Description:
<i>Objectives:</i> This study was undertaken to compare the results of laser (Ho:YAG) and pneumatic (ballistic) intracorporeal lithotripsy for ureteric calculi in terms of efficacy, safety and complications.
<i>Methods:</i> 55 patients having ureteric calculus were randomly allocated into pneumatic lithotripsy (PL) and laser lithotripsy (LL) groups.
Swiss lithoclast was used for PL (3 atm pressure and 12 Hz frequency) and the VersaPulse PowerSuite was used for LL.
Appropriate statistical tests were applied.
<i>Results:</i> 30 patients (34 stones) were treated with LL and 25 patients (25 stones) with PL.
Both groups were comparable in profile.
Mean lithotripsy time was 24.
03 ± 9.
51 min in the LL group and 19.
80 ± 4.
44 min in the PL group (p = 0.
027).
The immediate stone clearance rate was higher in the LL group (p = 0.
001), but it was comparable at 4 weeks (p = 0.
097).
Stone migration occurred in 16% of cases in the PL group.
No major complication was observed in either group.
<i>Conclusions:</i> We conclude that both laser and pneumatic energies are effective and safe for intracorporeal lithotripsy.
Laser lithotripsy takes more time but provides earlier stone-free status.
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...
Primerjalna književnost na prelomu tisočletja
Primerjalna književnost na prelomu tisočletja
In a comprehensive and at times critical manner, this volume seeks to shed light on the development of events in Western (i.e., European and North American) comparative literature ...
Semi-Rigid Pneumatic Ureteroscopicremoval of Ureteric Stone; Seven Years Experience At Nepalgunj Medical College
Semi-Rigid Pneumatic Ureteroscopicremoval of Ureteric Stone; Seven Years Experience At Nepalgunj Medical College
Background: The present study aimed to report the outcomes of ureteroscopy (URS) treatment of ureteric stone with semi-rigid pneumatic ureteroscopic lithotripsy.Method: This was a ...
COMPARISON OF STONE FREE RATE BETWEEN EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCKWAVE LITHOTRIPSY AND URETEROSCOPIC LASERTRIPSY IN THE MANAGEMENT OF PROXIMAL URETERAL STONES
COMPARISON OF STONE FREE RATE BETWEEN EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCKWAVE LITHOTRIPSY AND URETEROSCOPIC LASERTRIPSY IN THE MANAGEMENT OF PROXIMAL URETERAL STONES
Background: Proximal ureteric stones are a common urological condition, affecting up to 12% of the population. While smaller stones may pass spontaneously, larger stones often requ...
COMPARISON OF STENTED VERSUS NON-STENTED PATIENTS OF URETERIC CALCULI AFTER INTRACORPOREAL LITHOTRIPSY
COMPARISON OF STENTED VERSUS NON-STENTED PATIENTS OF URETERIC CALCULI AFTER INTRACORPOREAL LITHOTRIPSY
Background: Urolithiasis is a prevalent urological condition resulting from crystalline deposits in the urinary tract, often manifesting as acute flank pain and lower urinary tract...
Thermal effect of holmium laser during ureteroscopic lithotripsy
Thermal effect of holmium laser during ureteroscopic lithotripsy
Abstract
Background: Holmium laser lithotripsy is the most common technique for the management of ureteral stone. Studies founded that holmium laser firing can produce leth...
Thermal effect of holmium laser during ureteroscopic lithotripsy
Thermal effect of holmium laser during ureteroscopic lithotripsy
Abstract
Background
Holmium laser lithotripsy is the most common technique for the management of ureteral stone. Studies founded that holmium laser firing can produce heat which wi...
The clinical efficacy of novel vacuum suction ureteroscopic lithotripsy in the treatment of upper ureteral calculi
The clinical efficacy of novel vacuum suction ureteroscopic lithotripsy in the treatment of upper ureteral calculi
Abstract
This study investigated the clinical efficacy of a novel vacuum suction ureteroscopic approach in the treatment of upper ureteral calculi. A total of 160 patients ...

