Symptomatic small non-obstructing lower ureteric calculi: comparison of ureteroscopy and extra corporeal shock wave lithotripsy.
(1/95)
OBJECTIVE: To compare the success, efficacy and complications of ureteroscopy (URS) and extra corporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for the treatment of symptomatic small non obstructing lower ureteric calculi. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This prospective non-randomised study was conducted simultaneously at two urological referral centres, included 280 patients with symptomatic small (4-10 mm) lower ureteric calculi (situated below the sacroiliac joint), with good renal function on intravenous urography. Patients were offered both the treatment options. One hundred and sixty patients chose ureteroscopy, whereas 120 patients were treated by ESWL. Standard techniques of ureteroscopy and ESWL were employed. Patients were followed-up to assess the success rates and complications of the two procedures. RESULTS: Ureteroscopy achieved complete stone clearance in one session in 95% of patients. In six patients ureteroscopy had failed initially and was later accomplished in second session improving the success rate to 98.7%. Two patients had a proximal migration of calculus that needed ESWL. Of the 120 patients treated by ESWL, 90% achieved stone free status at three months. Ureteroscopy was needed for twelve patients (10%) where ESWL failed to achieve stone clearance. There were no significant ESWL related complications. ESWL was administered on outpatient basis, while patients needed hospitalisation and anaesthesia for ureteroscopy. CONCLUSION: ESWL can be the primary mode of treatment for symptomatic small non-obstructing lower ureteric calculi as it is minimally invasive and safe. Ureteroscopy can be offered to patients who demand immediate relief or when ESWL fails. (+info)
Ureteroscopy as an out-patient procedure: the Singapore General Hospital Urology Centre experience.
(2/95)
OBJECTIVE: To study the safety and efficacy of ureteroscopy as an out-patient procedure. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Teaching hospital, Singapore. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Operating facilities for out-patient ureteroscopy were introduced in late 1998. A retrospective review of all patients undergoing ureteroscopy from March 1999 to December 2000 was conducted. Clinical records were reviewed for operating time, surgical outcome and complications, and length of hospital stay and re-admissions. RESULTS: Two hundred and ten patients underwent ureteroscopy for a variety of indications--115 patients were admitted to hospital as in-patients and 95 patients were treated as out-patients. Ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy were performed using general or regional anaesthesia. Patients assessed to be American Society of Anesthesiology class I or II were eligible for an out-patient procedure. American Society of Anesthesiology class was found to be lower for those treated as out-patients compared with those undergoing in-patient procedures--63% versus 28% for class I and 36% versus 69% for class II. Mean operating time was 37 minutes for out-patient procedures and 57 minutes for in-patient procedures (P<0.01). Complications were low for out-patients, with six unplanned re-admissions, mostly for minor complications. All patients were discharged the following day. CONCLUSION: Ureteroscopy can be offered selectively as an out-patient procedure to patients with low surgical risk, especially American Society of Anesthesiology class I patients, and others expected to have an uncomplicated surgical procedure. (+info)
BACKGROUND: The efficacy and long-term results of endoscopic management of upper tract transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) were examined. The authors evaluated the accuracy of endoscopic biopsy in determining tumor grade in the subset of patients who underwent open surgical excision. METHODS: Between 1987 and 2001, 50 patients (17 with a solitary kidney) underwent ureteroscopy and biopsy of upper tract TCC. Eleven patients underwent ureterectomy or nephroureterectomy shortly after endoscopic biopsy. There was no follow-up for nine patients. Thirty patients underwent endoscopic ablation of their primary tumor with laser or electrofulguration at the time of the initial biopsy and were followed with close endoscopic surveillance at 3-4-month intervals. RESULTS: For the 30 patients who underwent endoscopic ablation, mean follow-up was 38 months (range, 4-106 months). There was an average of 3.4 recurrences, with an average time to first recurrence of 7 months. Ten of the 30 patients underwent open resection during follow-up. Six patients exhibited tumor progression at follow-up. During the follow-up period, one patient died of recurrent disease, and six died of other causes. Endoscopic biopsy accurately predicted the tumor grade for 8 of the 9 patients who had open tumor resection within 2 months of their last biopsy and for 10 of the 11 patients who had open resection shortly after their initial endoscopic biopsy (overall accuracy, 18 of 20 [90%]). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic treatment of focal low-grade TCC of the upper urinary tract is feasible and safe, provided that vigilant follow-up and endoscopic surveillance are performed. Endoscopic biopsy provides accurate information regarding tumor grade. (+info)
Treatment of lower urethral calculi with extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy and pneumatic ureteroscopic lithotripsy: a comparison of effectiveness and complications.
(4/95)
OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy and incidence of complications of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) compared with pneumatic ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URSL) in the treatment of lower uretheral calculi. METHODS: From August 1997 to June 1999, 210 patients with lower ureteric calculi were treated with ESWL and the other 180 with URSL. The stones were fragmented with pneumatic lithotripter. The outcome was assessed by evacuation, retreatment and complication rates. RESULTS: ESWL for lower ureteric calculi resulted in a stone evacuation rate of 78.1%, compared with 93.3% for URSL (P < 0.05). ESWL had a retreatment rate of 11.9% and a perforation rate of 0, while URSL caused perforation of ureters in 3.3% of patients and a refreatment of 2.2%. CONCLUSION: For the management of lower ureteric calculi, ESWL provides a non-invasive, simple and safe option, and URSL has a higher stone evacuation rate but causes ureter perforation more frequently than ESWL does. Both ESWL and URSL have their respective advantages. It is recommended, however, that URSL be extensively developed for better treatment efficacy, given that the operator has an adequate technical background. (+info)
Morbidity associated with surgical treatment of ureteric calculi in a teaching hospital in Kuwait.
(5/95)
BACKGROUND: Ureteric lithiasis is a common urological problem in Kuwait. Because of the different interventional approaches, we carried out an audit on the morbidity associated with the surgical management of the disorder. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The surgical records were reviewed of all patients with the diagnosis of ureteric lithiasis that were managed surgically by ureteroscopy or ureterolithotomy in Mubarak Al-Kabeer Hospital in Kuwait between January 1996 and December 1999. Patients' bio-data, location of calculi, indications for surgical intervention, types of therapeutic interventions, operating surgeon and complications were analysed. Patients managed primarily and successfully by extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy were excluded from this analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1383 patients with ureteric calculus were managed in the period under review--775 (56%), 567 (41%), and 41 (3%) patients were managed by extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, ureteroscopy and ureterolithotomy, respectively. The 608 patients managed by ureteroscopy or ureterolithotomy had a total of 710 operations. The commonest surgical procedure performed was ureteroscopy with Dormia basket with or without double 'J' stenting and this accounted for 418 (58.9%) operations. The least common procedure was ureteric meatotomy with Dormia basket and with or without double 'J' stenting in 9 (1.3%) patients. The overall complication rate was 110 out of 710 (15.5%) operations. Of the complications, 101 (92%) were minor (e.g. haematuria, fever, and mucosal injury). Nine (8%) complications were major complications (e.g. ureteric perforation and ureteric avulsions). Ureterolithotomy and ureteroscopy with intracorporeal lithotripsy were associated with the highest complication rates. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis has shown that with technological advances, the treatment of ureteric lithiasis has improved and major complications have decreased. However, with so many therapeutic options to choose from, there is a need to audit the various therapeutic options and select those associated with the least morbidity rates in each urology unit. (+info)
Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy and intracorporeal lithotripsy for proximal ureteric calculi--a comparative assessment of efficacy and safety.
(6/95)
INTRODUCTION: Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) is the treatment modality of choice of many urologists for proximal ureteric calculi. In this study, we compared the efficacy and safety of ESWL versus ureteroscopy with holmium laser lithotripsy for the treatment of this group of stones. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between May 1999 and October 2000, 50 patients had ESWL and another 51 patients underwent ureteroscopy with holmium laser lithotripsy for proximal ureteric calculi. The two groups were similar in age, sex ratio and stone size. ESWL was performed with the Dornier Compact lithotriptor whereas holmium laser lithotripsy was performed via retrograde ureteric access with a Wolf 7.5 Fr semirigid ureteroscope. RESULTS: Ureteroscopy with holmium laser lithotripsy was significantly better in terms of the mean procedure time (56 min in ESWL; 25 min in ureteroscopy; P < 0.001) and the 1-month stone free rate (50% in ESWL; 80% in ureteroscopy; P = 0.001). The 3-month stone free rate was also higher for ureteroscopy (78% in ESWL; 90% in ureteroscopy) but this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.09). Minor complications of steinstrasse (6%) occurred in ESWL and proximal stone migration (8%) occurred during ureteroscopy. CONCLUSION: Ureteroscopy with holmium laser lithotripsy is a viable and safe alternative to ESWL for the management of proximal ureteric calculi. (+info)
Ureterolithiasis after Cohen re-implantation--case report.
(7/95)
BACKGROUND: In the past decades, the widespread use of cross-trigonal ureteral reimplants for the treatment of children with vesicoureteral reflux has resulted in a large population of patients with transversely lying ureters. As this population gets older they will consequently be entering an age group at higher risk for stone and urothelial cancer formation. If ureteroscopy becomes necessary, the transverse position of the ureter makes ureteric access often impossible. CASE PRESENTATION: We present the case of a young man who not only suffered from urolithiasis due to hyperparathyroidism, but also further jeopardized his treatment by omitting the fact that as a child he underwent Cohen reimplantation of the right ureter. CONCLUSIONS: This case illustrates the particular difficulties the endoscopist may face in this group of patients. Patients with difficult ureteric access, abnormal anatomy, or those with known cross-trigonal ureteric reimplantations should be managed in a specialised endourology unit. (+info)
Advances in the surgical management of nephrolithiasis.
(8/95)
The surgical management of urinary calculus disease has undergone a dramatic evolution over the past 2 decades. Twenty years ago, open surgical procedures for urinary calculi were some of the most frequently performed urologic procedures. Since then, however, stone management has been at the forefront of "minimally invasive" intervention. Specifically, the initiation and refinement of percutaneous and ureteroscopic access to the upper tracts, along with the rapid and nearly simultaneous development of both extracorporeal and intracorporeal lithotripsy techniques, has limited the role of open surgery to less than 1% of patients undergoing intervention for their stone disease. This manuscript will review the current indications for the surgical management of urinary calculi, the basic physics of the most frequently utilized vehicles for both extracorporeal and intracorporeal lithotripsy, and the respective roles of extracorporeal and intracorporeal lithotripsy with percutaneous or ureteroscopic access and open surgery. In addition, the results and complications associated with each of these forms of intervention will be reviewed. Finally, a discussion of specific clinical challenges to the urologist will be presented. (+info)