Prospective randomized study of treatment of large proximal ureteral stones: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus ureterolithotripsy versus laparoscopy.

Abstract

PURPOSE:

The best treatment modalities for large proximal ureteral stones are controversial, and include extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, ureterolithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotripsy, laparoscopic ureterolithotomy and open surgery. To the best of our knowledge extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, semirigid ureterolithotripsy and laparoscopic ureterolithotomy have not been previously compared for the treatment of large proximal ureteral stones. Therefore, we compared these modalities for the treatment of large proximal ureteral stones.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

A total of 48 patients with large proximal ureteral stones (greater than 1 cm) were prospectively randomized and enrolled in the study at a single institution between 2008 and 2010. Eligible patients were assigned to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, semirigid ureterolithotripsy or laparoscopic ureterolithotomy.

RESULTS:

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy had a 35.7% success rate, semirigid ureterolithotripsy 62.5% and laparoscopic ureterolithotomy 93.3%. Stone-free rates showed a statistically significant difference among the groups (p = 0.005). Patients treated with laparoscopic ureterolithotomy vs semirigid ureterolithotripsy vs extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy required fewer treatment sessions (mean ± SD 1.9 ± 0.3 vs 2.2 ± 0.6 vs 2.9 ± 1.4, p = 0.027). Neither major nor long-term complications were observed.

CONCLUSIONS:

Proximal ureteral stone treatment requires multiple procedures until complete stone-free status is achieved. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy is associated with higher success rates and fewer surgical procedures, but with more postoperative pain, longer procedures and a longer hospital stay. Although it is associated with the highest success rates for large proximal ureteral calculi, laparoscopic ureterolithotomy remains a salvage, second line procedure, and it seems more advantageous than open ureterolithotomy. At less well equipped centers, where semirigid ureterolithotripsy or extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy is not available, it remains a good treatment option.

• Authors: Antonio Corrêa Lopes Neto, Fernando Korkes, Jarques Lúcio Silva 2nd, Rodrigo Dal Moro Amarante, Mario H Elias Mattos, Marcos Tobias-Machado, Antonio Carlos Lima Pompeo
• Journal: The Journal of urology (J Urol) Vol. 187 Issue 1 Pg. 164-8 (Jan 2012) ISSN: 1527-3792 [Electronic] United States
• PMID: 22100003 (Publication Type: Comparative Study, Journal Article, Randomized Controlled Trial)
• Copyright: Copyright © 2012 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Topics

• Female
• Humans
• Laparoscopy
• Lithotripsy (methods)
• Male
• Middle Aged
• Prospective Studies
• Ureteral Calculi (pathology, therapy)