Endoscopyvs.Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy in the Treatment of Distal Ureteral Stones: Ten Years' Experience
- 1 April 1999
- journal article
- Published by Mary Ann Liebert Inc in Journal of Endourology
- Vol. 13 (3) , 161-164
- https://doi.org/10.1089/end.1999.13.161
Abstract
The lower third is the location of the great majority of ureteral stones. Treatment of these stones remains controversial: in situ extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) vs. ureteroscopy (URS). During the last decade, 633 distal ureteral calculi were treated at our institution using in situ SWL (Siemens Lithostar electromagnetic lithotripter) in 395 patients and URS (with 11.5F instrument and ultrasonic lithotripsy) in 228 patients. The patients' age and stone size were similar in the two groups. All SWL therapies were performed on an outpatient basis. The overall success rate was 99% for SWL, and the efficiency quotient (EQ) was 92.4%. The treatment was more effective for 10 mm.Keywords
This publication has 22 references indexed in Scilit:
- Ureteroscopy with Intravenous Sedation for Treatment of Distal Ureteral Calculi: A Safe and Effective Alternative to Shock Wave LithotripsyJournal of Urology, 1996
- The case for primary endoscopic management of upper urinary tract calculi: II. Cost and outcome assessment of 112 primary ureteral calculiUrology, 1995
- Cost-Efficacy Comparison of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy and Endoscopic Laser Lithotripsy in Distal Ureteral Stones*Journal of Endourology, 1993
- Lithostar: An Electromagnetic Acoustic Shock Wave Unit for Extracorporeal LithotripsyJournal of Endourology, 1989
- In SituESWL ν Ureteroscopy: The Case for Ureteroscopy*Journal of Endourology, 1989
- Primary Choice of Intervention for Distal Ureteric Stone: Ureteroscopy or ESWL?British Journal of Urology, 1988
- Pulsed Dye Laser for Treatment of Ureteral CalculiUrologic Clinics of North America, 1988
- MANAGEMENT OF URETERIC STONE: A REVIEW OF 292 CASES1British Journal of Urology, 1965