EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCK‐WAVE LITHOTRIPSY FOR DISTAL URETERIC CALCULI
- 1 April 1992
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in Anz Journal of Surgery
- Vol. 62 (4) , 283-286
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-2197.1992.tb07557.x
Abstract
The results of 67 consecutive patients referred to the New South Wales Lithotripter Centre with distal ureteric calculi were evaluated. All these patients were treated on the Dornier HM3 Lithotripter. Distal ureteric calculi were classified as those at, or distal to, the proximal margin of the sacro-iliac joint. Eleven patients with stones overlying the sacro-iliac joint were treated in the prone position, while 56 patients with stones distal to the sacro-iliac joint, were treated in the saddle (astride) position. Of the 64 patients in whom follow-up was available, 44 (69%) were rendered totally stone free by extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL). Lithotripsy has proved an effective treatment for distal ureteric calculi and has rendered 69% of patients stone free with minimal morbidity. Stones overlying the sacro-iliac joint can be successfully treated in the prone position.Keywords
This publication has 9 references indexed in Scilit:
- Is Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy Suitable Treatment for Lower Ureteric Stones?British Journal of Urology, 1988
- Treatment of Lower Ureteral Calculi with Extracorporeal Shock Wave LithotripsyJournal of Urology, 1988
- Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in the Prone Position: Treatment of Stones in the Distal Ureter or Anomalous KidneyJournal of Urology, 1988
- Treatment of Prevesical Ureteral Calculi by Extracorporeal Shock Wave LithotripsyJournal of Urology, 1988
- The Treatment of 100 Consecutive Patients with Ureteral Calculi in a British Stone CenterJournal of Urology, 1987
- Complications of Ureteroscopy in Relation to Experience: Report of Survey and Author ExperienceJournal of Urology, 1987
- Elective Treatment of Ureteral Stones with Extracorporeal Shock Wave LithotripsyEuropean Urology, 1987
- The Treatment of Ureteric Stones:Report on 1120 PatientsBritish Journal of Urology, 1980