ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
|
Year : 2020 | Volume
: 32
| Issue : 3 | Page : 113-116 |
|
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for bladder stones: Does it have any role in the modern endourology era?
Theodoros Karagiotis, Athanasios Papatsoris, Andreas Skolarikos, Charalampos Deliveliotis
Department of Urology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Sismanoglio Hospital, Athens, Greece
Correspondence Address:
Theodoros Karagiotis Department of Urology, Paediatric Urology and Urological Oncology, European Robotic Institute, St. Antonius Hospital Gronau Greece
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
DOI: 10.4103/HUAJ.HUAJ_20_20
|
|
Bladder lithiasis accounts for around 5% of all urinary tract stones diseases with typical symptoms dysuria, hematuria, urgency and intermittent urination. therapy, percutaneous procedures, and open surgical treatments have been replaced by transurethral lithotripsy. The aim of this study is to investigate the safety and efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in the treatment of vesical lithiasis. A total of 47 patients underwent ESWL for bladder calculi, using the electromagnetic Dornier Lithotripter S. Stone and prostate size as well as postvoid urine residual was determined with sonography. The success of the procedure was determined in the absence of stone fragments after 4 weeks. The mean age of patients was 69.1 years (34–93 ± 11.43) with a median prostate size at 50.1 cm3 (0–85 ± 15.81) and an average postvoid residual at 131 ml (50–190 ± 32.82). The mean size of lithiasis was found 1.97 cm (1–4.5 ± 0.79) and the median number of impact waves 2704.34 (1800–3000 ± 293.37) with the average duration of session 20.63 min (15–25 ± 2.63). Only two patients received analgesic treatment and the mean pain visual analog scale score was 1.73 (0–4 ± 0.98). The stone-free rate was found at 76.5% (36/47) and no severe complications (Clavien–Dindo >2) were observed. ESWL is a safe and efficient alternative for the management of vesical lithiasis, especially for high-risk patients that are not candidates for a more invasive treatment.
|
|
|
|
[FULL TEXT] [PDF]* |
|
 |
|