TY - JOUR
T1 - A multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of transureteral and shock wave Lithotripsy-Which is the best minimally invasive modality to treat distal ureteral calculi in children?
AU - Basiri, Abbas
AU - Zare, Samad
AU - Tabibi, Ali
AU - Sharifiaghdas, Farzaneh
AU - Aminsharifi, Alireza
AU - Mousavi-Bahar, Seyed Habibollah
AU - Ahmadnia, Hassan
PY - 2010/9
Y1 - 2010/9
N2 - Purpose: Since there is insufficient evidence to determine the best treatment modality in children with distal ureteral calculi, we designed a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and complications of transureteral and shock wave lithotripsy in these patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 100 children with distal ureteral calculi were included in the study. Of the patients 50 were randomized consecutively to undergo shock wave lithotripsy using a Compact Delta II lithotriptor (Dornier MedTech, Kennesaw, Georgia), and 50 were randomized to undergo transureteral lithotripsy with holmium laser and pneumatic lithotriptor between February 2007 and October 2009. Stone-free, complication and efficiency quotient rates were assessed in each group. Results: Mean ± SD patient age was 6.5 ± 3.7 years (range 1 to 13). Mean stone surface was 35 mm2 in the transureteral group and 37 mm2 in the shock wave lithotripsy group. Stone-free rates at 2 weeks after transureteral lithotripsy and single session shock wave lithotripsy differed significantly, at 78% and 56%, respectively (p = 0.004). With 2 sessions of shock wave lithotripsy the stone-free rate increased to 72%. Efficiency quotient was significantly higher for transureteral vs shock wave lithotripsy (81% vs 62%, p = 0.001). Minor complications were comparable and negligible between the groups. Two patients (4%) who underwent transureteral lithotripsy sustained a ureteral perforation. Conclusions: In the short term it seems that transureteral and shock wave lithotripsy are acceptable modalities for the treatment of distal ureteral calculi in children. However, transureteral lithotripsy has a higher efficacy rate when performed meticulously by experienced hands using appropriate instruments.
AB - Purpose: Since there is insufficient evidence to determine the best treatment modality in children with distal ureteral calculi, we designed a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and complications of transureteral and shock wave lithotripsy in these patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 100 children with distal ureteral calculi were included in the study. Of the patients 50 were randomized consecutively to undergo shock wave lithotripsy using a Compact Delta II lithotriptor (Dornier MedTech, Kennesaw, Georgia), and 50 were randomized to undergo transureteral lithotripsy with holmium laser and pneumatic lithotriptor between February 2007 and October 2009. Stone-free, complication and efficiency quotient rates were assessed in each group. Results: Mean ± SD patient age was 6.5 ± 3.7 years (range 1 to 13). Mean stone surface was 35 mm2 in the transureteral group and 37 mm2 in the shock wave lithotripsy group. Stone-free rates at 2 weeks after transureteral lithotripsy and single session shock wave lithotripsy differed significantly, at 78% and 56%, respectively (p = 0.004). With 2 sessions of shock wave lithotripsy the stone-free rate increased to 72%. Efficiency quotient was significantly higher for transureteral vs shock wave lithotripsy (81% vs 62%, p = 0.001). Minor complications were comparable and negligible between the groups. Two patients (4%) who underwent transureteral lithotripsy sustained a ureteral perforation. Conclusions: In the short term it seems that transureteral and shock wave lithotripsy are acceptable modalities for the treatment of distal ureteral calculi in children. However, transureteral lithotripsy has a higher efficacy rate when performed meticulously by experienced hands using appropriate instruments.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77956548455&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77956548455&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.juro.2010.05.021
DO - 10.1016/j.juro.2010.05.021
M3 - Article
C2 - 20650490
AN - SCOPUS:77956548455
SN - 0022-5347
VL - 184
SP - 1106
EP - 1109
JO - Journal of Urology
JF - Journal of Urology
IS - 3
ER -