Document Detail

Which is the best option to treat large (>1.5 cm) midureteric calculi?
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  19670976     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
INTRODUCTION: Before the 1980s, ureteric stones were managed by open ureterolithotomy. Since the introduction of shock-wave lithotripsy (SWL) and ureteroscopy, the use of an open surgical approach for the removal of ureteric stones has rapidly declined. Open surgery, which is currently being replicated by laparoscopic techniques, is generally indicated for failed endourologic procedures, particularly in centers that do not have flexible ureteroscopy or laser lithotripter, and in patients with larger stones. Considering this, we conducted a retrospective study to compare the different modalities for the management of midureteric calculi of more than 1.5 cm. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between August 2000 and July 2005, a total of 71 patients with large midureteric calculi (>1.5 cm in size) were treated with the three different modalities; SWL, ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy (URS), and laparoscopic ureterolithotomy at AMAI Trust's Institute of Urology. Data were collected and all the patients were analyzed for stone-free rate, intraoperative and immediate postoperative complications, and the results were calculated. RESULTS: Stone clearance was 39.1% with SWL (group 1), 79.2% with ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy (group 2), and 100% with the laparoscopic method (group 3), with a statistically significant difference between groups 1 and three and groups 1 and 2, but there was no statistical significance in groups 2 and three. However, hospital stay and hence morbidity was significantly greater in group 3, when compared to the other two groups. CONCLUSION: SWL gives the least clearance for large midureteric calculi. Statistically, URS and laparoscopic ureterolithotomy give equal results; hence, URS still remains the treatment of choice for the treatment of large midureteric calculi considering the low morbidity and acceptable stone-free rate of the procedure. Though laparoscopic ureterolithotomy can be considered as a treatment option, prospective, randomized trials are needed to confirm the efficacy of one modality of treatment over the other.
Suparu Khaladkar; Jayesh Modi; Manish Bhansali; Satyen Dobhada; Suresh Patankar
Related Documents :
17437196 - Paradoxical scalloped placenta with polyhydramnios in twin-twin transfusion syndrome.
9926016 - Evaluation of enterolithiasis in equids: 900 cases (1973-1996).
9396526 - Early and late results of excision of choledochal cysts.
19099516 - Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: primary patients versus patients with history of open ren...
9217126 - Midline mandibular osteotomy: an analysis of functional outcomes.
1460716 - Management of peripheral vascular problems in recipients of cardiac allografts.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Comparative Study; Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Journal of laparoendoscopic & advanced surgical techniques. Part A     Volume:  19     ISSN:  1092-6429     ISO Abbreviation:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A     Publication Date:  2009 Aug 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2009-08-12     Completed Date:  2009-10-29     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  9706293     Medline TA:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  501-4     Citation Subset:  IM    
Department of Urology, AMAI Trust's Institute of Urology, S. No.32/2A Gulawani Maharaj Road, Erandwane, Maharashtra, Pune, India.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Cohort Studies
Length of Stay
Middle Aged
Retrospective Studies
Treatment Outcome
Ureteral Calculi / complications,  pathology*,  therapy*
Young Adult

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  The peritoneal fibrinolytic response to conventional and laparoscopic colonic surgery.
Next Document:  Hernia endotrainer: results of training on self-designed hernia trainer box.