Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Fall;6(4):162-6.
doi: 10.15171/jlms.2015.12. Epub 2015 Oct 27.

Flexible Ureterorenoscopy Versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for the Treatment of Renal Pelvis Stones of 10-20 mm in Obese Patients

Babak Javanmard  1 , Mohammad Reza Razaghi  1 , Anahita Ansari Jafari  1 , Mohammad Mohsen Mazloomfard  1
Affiliations

Flexible Ureterorenoscopy Versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for the Treatment of Renal Pelvis Stones of 10-20 mm in Obese Patients

Babak Javanmard et al. J Lasers Med Sci. 2015 Fall.

Abstract

Introduction: To compare outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) as treatment of choice.

Methods: A total number of 46 patients with renal pelvic stones 10-20 mm and body mass index (BMI) >30 randomized in two groups underwent RIRS and ESWL from 2011 to 2014 and followed for 3 months.

Results: The patients mean ± SD age was 36.1 ± 13.1 years in ESWL and 33.2 ± 11.4 years in RIRS groups (P = .1) with comparable BMI in both groups (36.2 vs 38.1). In ESWL and RIRS groups, the operation time was 72.2 ± 21 vs 66.5 ± 19 minutes (P = .061), respectively. Stone free rate (SFR) at 3 months was 68% in ESWL group vs 90.4% in RIRS group (P = .019). The complication rate was 20% in ESWL group vs 14.2% in RIRS group (P = .211) but all of them were minor and managed conservatively.

Conclusion: According to our study, RIRS procedure in comparison with ESWL is a safe and successful option of treatment for renal pelvis stone of 10-20 mm in obese people.

Keywords: Kidney; Lithotripsy; Obesity; Stone.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Abe T, Akakura K, Kawaguchi M. et al. Outcomes of shockwave lithotripsy for upper urinary-tract stones: a large-scale study at a single institution. J Endourol. 2005;19:768–777. doi: 10.1089/end.2005.19.768. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Afane JS, Olweny EO, Bercowsky E. et al. Flexible ureteroscopes: a single center evaluation of the durability and function of the new endoscopes smaller than 9Fr. J Urol. 2000;164:1164–1168. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(05)67133-9. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bas O, Bakirtas H, Sener NC. et al. Comparison of shock wave lithotripsy, flexible ureterorenoscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotripsy on moderate size renal pelvis stones. Urolithiasis. 2014;42(2):115–120. doi: 10.1007/s00240-013-0615-2. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Moe OW. Kidney stones: pathophysiology and medical management. Lancet. 2006;367:333–344. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(06)68071-9. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Stamatelou KK, Francis ME, Jones CA, Nyberg LM, Curhan GC. Time trends in reported prevalence of kidney stones in the United States: 1976-1994. Kidney Int. 2003;63:1817–1823. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1755.2003.00917.x. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources