Javascript must be enabled to continue!
COMPARISON OF STONE FREE RATE BETWEEN EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCKWAVE LITHOTRIPSY AND URETEROSCOPIC LASERTRIPSY IN THE MANAGEMENT OF PROXIMAL URETERAL STONES
View through CrossRef
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 require active intervention to prevent complications such as obstruction and renal impairment. Treatment options have evolved from invasive surgeries to less invasive modalities like extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) and ureteroscopic lasertripsy (URS laser). Selecting the optimal modality is critical for maximizing stone clearance and minimizing complications.
Objective: To compare the stone-free rates and clinical outcomes of ESWL and URS laser in the management of proximal ureteral stones.
Methods: This randomized controlled trial was conducted at the Department of Urology, Institute of Kidney Diseases, Peshawar, from September 2024 to February 2025. A total of 166 patients diagnosed with proximal ureteric stones on non-contrast CT KUB were enrolled and equally divided into two groups. Group A (n=83) underwent ESWL using the Storz Modulith SLX-F2 lithotripter, while Group B (n=83) received URS laser using a semi-rigid ureteroscope with Holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy. Data were recorded using a structured proforma and analyzed with SPSS version 23. Stone-free status was assessed by CT KUB one month post-treatment.
Results: The mean age was 39.18 ± 11.95 years in Group A and 39.19 ± 11.24 years in Group B (p = 0.339). The stone-free rate was significantly higher in Group B (92.8%, n=77) compared to Group A (47%, n=39) (p = 0.001). The overall complication rate was 26.5% in Group A and 37.3% in Group B (p = 0.008). Re-treatment was required in 48.2% (n=40) of Group A patients and 7.2% (n=6) in Group B (p = 0.001). No ureteral perforations were reported in either group.
Conclusion: URS laser provides a significantly higher stone-free rate and lower need for re-treatment compared to ESWL in the management of proximal ureteric stones, supporting its use as a preferred treatment option.
Health and Research Insights
Title: COMPARISON OF STONE FREE RATE BETWEEN EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCKWAVE LITHOTRIPSY AND URETEROSCOPIC LASERTRIPSY IN THE MANAGEMENT OF PROXIMAL URETERAL STONES
Description:
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 require active intervention to prevent complications such as obstruction and renal impairment.
Treatment options have evolved from invasive surgeries to less invasive modalities like extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) and ureteroscopic lasertripsy (URS laser).
Selecting the optimal modality is critical for maximizing stone clearance and minimizing complications.
Objective: To compare the stone-free rates and clinical outcomes of ESWL and URS laser in the management of proximal ureteral stones.
Methods: This randomized controlled trial was conducted at the Department of Urology, Institute of Kidney Diseases, Peshawar, from September 2024 to February 2025.
A total of 166 patients diagnosed with proximal ureteric stones on non-contrast CT KUB were enrolled and equally divided into two groups.
Group A (n=83) underwent ESWL using the Storz Modulith SLX-F2 lithotripter, while Group B (n=83) received URS laser using a semi-rigid ureteroscope with Holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy.
Data were recorded using a structured proforma and analyzed with SPSS version 23.
Stone-free status was assessed by CT KUB one month post-treatment.
Results: The mean age was 39.
18 ± 11.
95 years in Group A and 39.
19 ± 11.
24 years in Group B (p = 0.
339).
The stone-free rate was significantly higher in Group B (92.
8%, n=77) compared to Group A (47%, n=39) (p = 0.
001).
The overall complication rate was 26.
5% in Group A and 37.
3% in Group B (p = 0.
008).
Re-treatment was required in 48.
2% (n=40) of Group A patients and 7.
2% (n=6) in Group B (p = 0.
001).
No ureteral perforations were reported in either group.
Conclusion: URS laser provides a significantly higher stone-free rate and lower need for re-treatment compared to ESWL in the management of proximal ureteric stones, supporting its use as a preferred treatment option.
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...
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, ...
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 ...
Safety and efficacy of ureteroscopy for the treatment of large impacted proximal ureteralstones
Safety and efficacy of ureteroscopy for the treatment of large impacted proximal ureteralstones
Introduction and objective: Management of large impacted proximal ureteral stones is often challenging due to the presence of mucosal edema, inflammation and angulations of the ure...
A Prospective Randomized Study of Large Proximal Ureteral Stones: Uretero-lithotripsy v/s Laparoscopy
A Prospective Randomized Study of Large Proximal Ureteral Stones: Uretero-lithotripsy v/s Laparoscopy
Background
Upper one third ureteric stones has plethora of treatment, choice being medical expulsive therapy, shock wave lithotripsy (SWL), ureteroscopy (URS), laparoscopic and op...
Application of tip-bendable ureteral access sheath in flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy: an initial experience of 224 cases
Application of tip-bendable ureteral access sheath in flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy: an initial experience of 224 cases
Abstract
Introduction:
During the last decades, the advent of flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy has revolutionized the management of upper urinary tract stones. We design...
Rigid ureteroscopic lithotripsy with a pressure-controlling ureteral access sheath for complex steinstrasse
Rigid ureteroscopic lithotripsy with a pressure-controlling ureteral access sheath for complex steinstrasse
Abstract
Objective
To evaluate the safety and efficacy of rigid ureteroscopic lithotripsy with a pressure-controlling ureteral access sheath (PC-UAS...
Comparing Ureteral Catheterization's Impact on Flank Pain Post Ureteroscopic Stone Management
Comparing Ureteral Catheterization's Impact on Flank Pain Post Ureteroscopic Stone Management
Background: Urolithiasis, or kidney stone disease, is a prevalent condition that poses significant challenges in urological practice. The management of ureteral stones, particularl...


