Comparison of treatment outcomes according to output voltage during shockwave lithotripsy for ureteral calculi: a prospective randomized multicenter study

Park, Jinsung; Kim, Hong-Wook; Hong, Sungwoo; Yang, Hee Jo; Chung, Hong

doi:10.1007/s00345-014-1438-7

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Holmium laser is a kind of new laser commonly used in urological surgery. It can crush all kinds stones with whatever composition and density and cause little ureteral mucosal damage [7][8][9][10] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of YAG Laser Lithotripsy and Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in Treatment of Ureteral Calculi: A Meta-Analysis

Yang

Li²,

Cui³

2016

Urol Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficiency and safety of ureteroscopy lithotripsy (URSL) with holmium laser technology and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) on ureteral calculi using systematic reviews. Methods: Randomized controlled trials and prospective controlled trials accorded with inclusion among PubMed Database, EmBase Database, Cochrane Library and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were collected. Review Manager 5.0 was adopted to estimate the effects of the results among selected articles. Forest plots, sensitivity analysis and bias analysis for the articles included were also conducted. Pooled estimate of risk ratios and standard mean difference (SMD) with 95% CIs were used as measures of effect sizes. Results: Finally 1,770 patients were included in the 14 studies, which eventually satisfied the eligibility criteria. The number of patients in URSL group and ESWL group were 885 and 885, respectively. The results of heterogeneity test suggested that complication events (RR 1.12 (95% CI 0.63-2.00), p = 0.70), hospital days (SMD = -0.08 (95% CI -1.14 to 0.98), p = 0.88) and efficiency quotient (RR 1.31 (95% CI 0.96-1.80), p = 0.09) were insignificantly different, while the stone-free rate (RR 1.15 (95% CI 1.06-1.26), p = 0.002) and operation time (SMD = -2.27 (95% CI -3.42 to -1.11), p = 0.0001) between ESWL and URSL were significantly different. Conclusion: Although both URSL and ESWL have its own advantages and drawbacks, URSL is relatively a more efficient and safe method to treat ureteric stones, since it has shorter operation time and a better stone-free rate.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is widely used in clinical treatment, and this method of removing stones has advantages such as simple operation, less pain and lower cost [4][5][6][7] . Although ESWL is one of the most commonly used methods in the treat-…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%