BackgroundThere are many options for urologists to treat ureteral stones that range from 8 mm to 15 mm, including ESWL and ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy. While both ESWL and ureteroscopy are effective and minimally invasive procedures, there is still controversy over which one is more suitable for ureteral stones.ObjectiveTo perform a retrospective study to compare the efficiency, safety and complications using ESWL vs. ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy in management of ureteral stones.MethodsBetween October 2010 and October 2012, 160 patients who underwent ESWL or ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy at Suzhou municipal hospital for a single radiopaque ureteral stone (the size 8–15 mm) were evaluated. All patients were followed up with ultrasonography for six months. Stone clearance rate, costs and complications were compared.ResultsSimilarity in stone clearance rate and treatment time between the two procedures; overall procedural time, analgesia requirement and total cost were significantly different. Renal colic and gross hematuria were more frequent with ESWL while voiding symptoms were more frequent with ureteroscopy. Both procedures used for ureteral stones ranging from 8 to 15 mm were safe and minimally invasive.ConclusionESWL remains first line therapy for proximal ureteral stones while ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy costs more. To determining which one is preferable depends on not only stone characteristics but also patient acceptance and cost-effectiveness ratio.

PURPOSE: To perform a retrospective study to compare the efficiency, safety and costs using aspiration-sclerotherapy with 95% ethanol vs. laparoscopic decortications in management of symptomatic simple renal cysts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with simple renal cysts (diamante > 4 cm) were recruited from our hospital between October 2008 and October 2012. A total of 986 patients (Group 1) underwent aspiration-sclerotherapy with 95% ethanol and 208 patients (Group 2) underwent laparoscopic decortication. All patients were followed up with ultrasonography or computerized tomography (CT) for one year. Regression rates, recurrence rates and costs were compared. RESULTS: Similarity in symptoms (back pain, cloudy urine or mass in abdomen), renal cyst size, and cyst distribution, complete regression rate after treatment between the two groups; A higher recurrence rate, but shorter procedure times and lower cost in Group 1 compared to Group 2. The procedures used for both groups were safe and had minimum complications. CONCLUSION: Aspiration-sclerotherapy, as well as laparoscopic decortication are effective and safe therapy for symptomatic simple renal cysts. Aspiration-sclerotherapy is more suitable for medium size of renal cysts, while Laparoscopic decortication is superior to the cysts in large sizes.