Painful Caliceal Calculi

Brandt, Bodil; Ostri, P; Lange, P; Kristensen, Jørgen Kvist

doi:10.3109/00365599309180418

Cited by 29 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, treatment is recommended in cases in which stones are continuously increasing in size, there is a high risk of additional stone formation, there is obstruction due to the stones, infection, pain, or hematuria, or stones are >1.5 cm. Treatment is also recommended if it is desired with regard to the patient’s social situation [67]. As mentioned earlier, the EAU guideline suggests SWL and RIRS for the primary treatment of renal stones <2 cm, and PCNL for the primary treatment for stones >2 cm.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of stone-free rates following shock wave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal stones: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing stone-free rates following retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL), and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) treatments of renal stones. Materials and methods Clinical trials comparing RIRS, SWL, and PCNL for treatment of renal stones were identified from electronic databases. Stone-free rates for the procedures were compared by qualitative and quantitative syntheses (meta-analyses). Outcome variables are shown as risk ratios (ORs) with 95% credible intervals (CIs). Results A total of 35 studies were included in this network meta-analysis of success and stone-free rates following three different treatments of renal stones. Six studies compared PCNL versus SWL, ten studies compared PCNL versus RIRS, fourteen studies compared RIRS versus SWL, and five studies compared PCNL, SWL, and RIRS. The quality scores within subscales were relatively low-risk. Network meta-analyses indicated that stone-free rates of RIRS (OR 0.38; 95% CI 0.22–0.64) and SWL (OR 0.12; 95% CI 0.067–0.19) were lower than that of PCNL. In addition, stone-free rate of SWL was lower than that of RIRS (OR 0.31; 95% CI 0.20–0.47). Stone free rate of PCNL was also superior to RIRS in subgroup analyses including ≥ 2 cm stone (OR 4.680; 95% CI 2.873–8.106), lower pole stone (OR 1.984; 95% CI 1.043–2.849), and randomized studies (OR 2.219; 95% CI 1.348–4.009). In rank-probability test, PCNL was ranked as No. 1 and SWL was ranked as No. 3. Conclusions PCNL showed the highest success and stone-free rate in the surgical treatment of renal stones. In contrast, SWL had the lowest success and stone-free rate.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of stone-free rates following shock wave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal stones: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In generale, i lavori relativi all'uso dell'URS flessibile per il trattamento della litiasi endorenale, o retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), prevedono le seguenti indicazioni al trattamento attivo (17): crescita dimensionale nel follow up , incuneamento e ostruzione a livello del giunto pielo-ureterale, infezione, sintomaticità (dolore o ematuria), diametro >15 mm, litiasi in pazienti ad alto rischio di formazione di calcoli.…”

Section: Risultatiunclassified

Ureteroscopy: is it the best?

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the last 40 years the treatment of urolithiasis passed from open surgical therapies to minimally invasive approaches. From the introduction of the first ureteroscopes in '80s many technological improvements allowed to reduce endourological instruments' size, ensuring in the meanwhile an increasingly high success rate in the resolution of the urolithiasis. The purpose of the study is to review the current role of the ureteroscopy(URS) in the treatment of urinary stones. A non-systematic review was performed considering the most recent Guidelines and results from Literature. The results confirm that, considering ureteral calculi, the stone-free rate (SFR) for URS is significantly higher than for ESWL in the treatment of distal ureteral stones <10 mm and >10 mm. Endoscopy has a first-line role also in the treatment of proximal ureteral stones >10 mm, together with ESWL. Retreatment rate and ancillary procedures are also lower in patients treated with URS, despite it is more invasive if compared with ESWL. Recent data are available in Literature about the treatment of nephrolithiasis with Retrograde Intra-Renal Surgery (RIRS). RIRS is the first-line treatment, together with ESWL, for stones <20 mm, and second choice for stones >20 mm. However, for large renal stones the role of RIRS is still being discussed. In conclusion, the majority of urinary stones can be treated by rigid or flexible URS. Further studies are required to clarify the role of endoscopy in the treatment of large stones, especially if compared to percutaneous approaches.

show abstract

“…Taş boyutunun artması, obstrüksiyonun varlığı, enfeksiyon bulunması, akut ya da kronik ağrı olması alt kaliks taşlarında aktif tedavi endikasyonlarıdır. (2,3) İnci ve arkadaşları asemptomatik alt kaliks taşlarının toplam 52 aylık takip periyodu boyunca %33 oranında büyüme gösterdiğini ve bunların sadece %11'inde aktif tedaviye ihtiyaç duyulduğunu rapor etmiştir. (4) Günümüzde dışarıdan şok dalgasi ile taş kırma (ESWL), perkütan nefrolitotomi (PCNL), fleksibl üreterorenoskopi (fURS) ve laparoskopik cerrahi böbrek taşlarının tedavisinde kullanılan başlıca tedavi metodlarıdır.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified