Factors influencing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy efficiency for optimal patient selection.

extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy kidney stones stone volume

Journal

Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques
ISSN: 1895-4588
Titre abrégé: Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne
Pays: Poland
ID NLM: 101283175

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jun 2021
Historique:
received: 30 09 2020
accepted: 06 11 2020
entrez: 17 6 2021
pubmed: 18 6 2021
medline: 18 6 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Current literature suggests various predictors related to the stone and patient, which could influence stone fragmentation and clearance rates. To establish clinical characteristics of stone disease for patients undergoing extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) which may predict the success of the procedure. One hundred and nine patients with renal stone disease diagnosed by non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) who underwent ESWL between January 2015 and December 2019 were included in the study. Endpoints: patient being stone free (SF) or when < 4 mm fragments were detected. Age, gender, location, skin-to-stone distance, maximum stone length, stone volume, stone surface area, mean stone Hounsfield units (HU) and highest HU score were explored in uni- and multivariate regression analysis. Stone size revealed the highest prognostic power for ESWL failure, where OR for stone volume and stone surface area were 1.06 (1.03-1.10) and 1.04 (1.02-1.06), respectively (all p < 0.01) while a tendency was observed for skin-to-stone distance 1.02 (1.00-1.03). The amount of energy applied during the procedure to one cubic millimeter of stone volume (SMLI/stone volume) was predictive for treatment success (OR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.41-0.87, p < 0.01). Stone volume (OR = 1.06, 95% CI: 1.00-1.14, p = 0.01) and stone surface area (OR = 1.03, 95% CI: 1.01-1.06, p = 0.02) remained as statistically significant prognostic factors for treatment failure. Both greater stone volume and stone surface area, as well as lower power delivered per stone volume unit during the ESWL procedure, were found to be significant factors and could be useful to predict treatment failure.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34136039
doi: 10.5114/wiitm.2021.103915
pii: 43362
pmc: PMC8193744
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

409-416

Informations de copyright

Copyright: © 2021 Fundacja Videochirurgii.

Références

Urolithiasis. 2015 Feb;43(1):69-75
pubmed: 25139151
BMJ. 2007 Mar 3;334(7591):468-72
pubmed: 17332586
BJU Int. 2012 Dec;110(11 Pt B):E438-42
pubmed: 22372937
Urology. 2005 Jan;65(1):33-6
pubmed: 15667858
Urolithiasis. 2013 Nov;41(6):511-5
pubmed: 23907170
Int J Urol. 2013 Feb;20(2):214-9
pubmed: 22970896
J Urol. 2019 Nov;202(5):986-993
pubmed: 31112104
J Endourol. 2012 May;26(5):535-9
pubmed: 22050487
Oman Med J. 2018 May;33(3):209-217
pubmed: 29896328
PLoS One. 2016 Jul 07;11(7):e0158661
pubmed: 27387279
J Endourol. 2015 Feb;29(2):226-30
pubmed: 25046472
Urology. 2005 Nov;66(5):941-4
pubmed: 16286099
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2014 Dec;25(12):2878-86
pubmed: 25104803
BJU Int. 2009 Feb;103(4):524-8
pubmed: 19007365
Eur Urol. 2007 Jun;51(6):1688-93; discussion 1693-4
pubmed: 17161522
Eur Radiol. 2005 Nov;15(11):2238-43
pubmed: 15806362
Arch Esp Urol. 2017 Oct;70(8):715-724
pubmed: 28976346
J Endourol. 2003 May;17(4):201-5
pubmed: 12816580
Investig Clin Urol. 2018 Jan;59(1):25-31
pubmed: 29333511
BJU Int. 2005 Jun;95(9):1285-8
pubmed: 15892818
J Endourol. 2009 Sep;23(9):1383-5
pubmed: 19694526
J Urol. 2011 Aug;186(2):556-62
pubmed: 21684557
Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2004;38(2):161-7
pubmed: 15204407
Clin Kidney J. 2018 Jun;11(3):364-369
pubmed: 29992018
J Endourol. 2017 Feb;31(2):169-173
pubmed: 27889982
Arab J Urol. 2014 Jun;12(2):155-61
pubmed: 26019941
BMC Urol. 2017 Jul 27;17(1):59
pubmed: 28750620
J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2015 Apr-Jun;27(2):384-7
pubmed: 26411123
J Endourol. 2005 Sep;19(7):768-73
pubmed: 16190825
PLoS One. 2015 Dec 14;10(12):e0144912
pubmed: 26659086
Turk J Urol. 2018 May;44(3):221-227
pubmed: 29733796

Auteurs

Marius Snicorius (M)

Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.

Arnas Bakavicius (A)

Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.

Albertas Cekauskas (A)

Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.

Marius Miglinas (M)

Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.

Gediminas Platkevicius (G)

Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.

Arunas Zelvys (A)

Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.

Classifications MeSH