Academic Journals Database
Disseminating quality controlled scientific knowledge

The need for additional equipment after ESWL in ureteroscopic lithotripsy

ADD TO MY LIST
 
Author(s): Bayram Güner | Turhan Çaşkurlu | Ayhan Karaköse | Lütfi Canat | Gökhan Atış | Gökhan Atış

Journal: Turkish Journal of Urology
ISSN 1300-5804

Volume: 37;
Issue: 4;
Start page: 307;
Date: 2011;
Original page

Keywords: Equipment | lithotripsy | treatment failure | ureteroscopy

ABSTRACT
Objective: This study evaluated our results with ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URS) in patients with failed extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy therapy (ESWL) and examined the effect of previous ESWL on the use of tools during URS, operating time, and outcome.Materials and methods: URS performed in two centers between 2008 and 2011 was reviewed retrospectively. The patients were divided into two groups according to the history of previous ESWL: 1) patients who underwent ESWL previously (n=39) and 2) no previous ESWL (n=116). Results: The demographic data were similar in both groups. The use of accessory tools and treatment failure was statistically higher in Group 1. The operating time was longer in Group 1. The need for re-operation, balloon dilatation, and ureteral catheter was similar in the two groups. However, the use of accessory equipment was increased by 56% in those with a previous ESWL. Balloon dilatation was required in 17.9% of the patients in Group 1. Conclusion: URS is the main treatment modality after the failure of ESWL. In patients with a history of ESWL, the need for accessory equipment is increased.
Why do you need a reservation system?      Save time & money - Smart Internet Solutions