Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Renal Calculi

SWL outcome in artificial hydronephrotic vs. non-hydronephrotic kidney for preschool children with high-density renal stones

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of artificial hydronephrosis on the result of shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in preschool children.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective randomized trial was performed between January 2013 and January 2017 with 300 pediatric patients, having kidney stones with a size of 1-2 cm and a density of 750-1100 HU. The patients were randomized into two groups: group A, in which a ureteric catheter was fixed and artificial hydronephrosis was performed by fluid irrigation prior to SWL, and group B which did not undergo hydronephrosis. SWL outcomes were compared between two groups.

RESULTS

In total, 153 cases were assigned to group A, and 147 cases were assigned to group B. Regarding demographic data, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. There were also no statistically significant differences in the number of shocks and energy power needed for each group. The results of SWL after the first session favored group A with a stone-free rate (SFR) of 90.8% vs. 75.5% for group B. The SFR after SWL was significantly in favor of group A (94.1%) vs. (86.4%) for group B.

CONCLUSION

The use of an artificial hydronephrosis technique to make interface around the stone improves stone-free rate and decreases the need for retreatment after SWL.

Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy Management of Renal Stones in Children: Does Anesthesia Affect the Treatment Outcomes on an Age-based Manner?

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate beneficial effect of anesthesia on extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in children older than 9 years.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 61 children (aged between 9 and 17 years) treated with SWL for renal stones were included. Depending on the use of general anesthesia, the children were divided into 2 groups: cases treated with SWL under anesthesia (group 1, n = 27) and cases treated with SWL without anesthesia (group 2, n = 34). The patients in both groups were comparatively evaluated with respect to treatment-related parameters (stone size, stone laterality, stone location, mean number of sessions, mean number of shock waves applied, residual fragments size, stone-free rate [SFR], clinically significant residual fragment complications, and need for additional intervention). The efficacy quotient was also evaluated.

RESULTS

The overall mean stone size was 10.48 ± 4.27 mm. Although there was no significant difference regarding the stone size (P = .924), stone laterality (P = .240), stone localization (P = .084), mean number of sessions (P = .392), SFR (P = .666), clinically significant residue (P = .526), size of residual fragments (P = .315), complication rates (P = 1.000), and need for additional intervention (P = 1.000), the mean number of shock waves applied was significantly higher in patients treated without anesthesia (group 2) (P = .001). The efficacy quotient was 41.7% and 35.4% for groups 1 and 2, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that anesthesia-free SWL for renal stones in children aged older than 9 years is feasible and successful with similar treatment outcome data observed in cases with the same age range being treated under anesthesia. We believe that SWL without anesthesia can be applied in a safe and successful manner in relatively older and cooperative children.

Does extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy cause hearing impairment in children?

PURPOSE

We evaluated the possible effects of noise created by high energy shock waves on the hearing function of children treated with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 65 children with normal hearing function were included in the study. Patients were divided into 3 groups, ie those becoming stone-free after 1 session of shock wave lithotripsy (group 1, 22 children), those requiring 3 sessions to achieve stone-free status (group 2, 21) and healthy children/controls (group 3, 22). Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy was applied with patients in the supine position with a 90-minute frequency and a total of 2,000 shock waves in each session (Compact Sigma, Dornier MedTech, Wessling, Germany). Second energy level was used with a maximum energy value of 58 joules per session in all patients. Hearing function and possible cochlear impairment were evaluated by transient evoked otoacoustic emissions test at 1.0, 1.4, 2.0, 2.8 and 4.0 kHz frequencies before the procedure, 2 hours later, and 1 month after completion of the first shock wave lithotripsy session in groups 1 and 2. In controls the same evaluation procedures were performed at the beginning of the study and 7 weeks later.

RESULTS

Regarding transient evoked otoacoustic emissions data, in groups 1 and 2 there was no significant alteration in values obtained after shock wave lithotripsy compared to values obtained at the beginning of the study, similar to controls.

CONCLUSIONS

A well planned shock wave lithotripsy procedure is a safe and effective treatment in children with urinary stones and causes no detectable harmful effect on hearing function.

Extracorporal shock wave lithotripsy in the management of stones in children with oxalosis--still the first choice?

BACKGROUND

Primary hyperoxaluria (PH) is a recognised cause of nephrolithiasis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the success of extracorporal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in treating nephrolithiasis in children with PH.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of patient characteristics, treatments and outcomes of 36 children with oxalate stones due to PH.

RESULTS

A total of 52 stones were formed in 28 patients, of which 23 stones were treated with ESWL. Of these 23 stones, ten improved and 13 did not; nine were located in the upper pole, nine in the lower pole and four and one in the pelvic and ureteric areas, respectively. All pelvic and ureteric stones improved, while 66.7 % of upper pole stones and 89.9 % of lower pole stones did not; 20 % of PH type 1 stones improved compared to 47 % of PH type 2 stones. The mean pre- and post-eGFR in stone-improvers was 98.82 and 104.7 ml/min/1.73 m(2), respectively; in the non-improvers, these values were 100.75 and 95.68 ml/min/1.73 m(2), respectively. Mean pre-ESWL stone size in the improved and non-improved groups was 7.3 mm and 8.5 mm respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our results, ESWL is not the ideal method of stone therapy for patients with PH. ESWL was more effective in treating pelvic and ureteric stones, with upper pole stone response being better than lower pole response. PH2 patients were more than twice as likely to respond to ESWL treatment. Stone size and prior preventive treatment did not affect outcome. eGFR was not affected by ESWL.

Modern management of stone disease in patients with a solitary kidney

Analysing the data available in the literature, contemporary methods of treatment of nephrolithiasis are limited to the methods of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and ureterorenoscopic lithotripsy (URSL), not excluding their use in the presence of developmental abnormalities and kidney impairment only. Minimally invasive methods have become standard procedures. A complement to ineffective URSL and PCNL treatment is extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. This is confirmed by 30 years of observation in the only treatment of kidney calculi by Alken launched in 1981 and continued by Jones et al. Before the era of endoscopic procedures (PCNL and URSL) effectively removed the only deposits in the kidney in open operations. Minimally invasive treatments are recommended for patients with localized deposits in the pelvicalyceal system or solitary kidney ureter. They are recognized as safe and effective treatment in a solitary kidney in particular in patients who have already been operated on.

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy as first line treatment for urinary tract stones in children: outcome of 500 cases

PURPOSE

The continued evolution of stone treatment modalities, such as endourologic procedures, open surgery and shock wave lithotripsy, makes the assessment of continuous outcomes are essential. Pediatric urolithiasis are an important health problem allover the world, especially in Middle East region. We evaluate the safety, efficacy and factors affecting success rate and clearance of stones in children treated with shock wave lithotripsy.

PATIENT AND METHODS

Between 2005 and 2010, a total of 500 children with stones in the upper urinary tract at different locations were treated by Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in our department, Sohag University, Egypt. We have used the Siemn's Lithostar Modularis machine, Germany. A total of 371 boys and 129 girls with the average age of 8.63 ± 5 years, and a range from 9 months to 17 years were included in this study. Diagnosis of their urinary calculi was established either by the use of abdominal ultrasound, plain X-ray, intravenous urography, or CT scan. The stones were located in the kidney in 450 (90%) patients; 298 (66%) pelvic, 26 (5.7%) upper calices, 57 (12.6%) mid calices, and lower calices in 69 (15.3%) patients. The average of their stone sizes was 12.5 ± 7.2 mm. The other 50 children their stone were located in the proximal ureteral stones in 35 patients (70%); middle third in 5 (10%) patients and in the distal ureter in 10 (20%) patients. The average ureteral stone size was 7.5 ± 3.2 mm. All children were treated under general anesthesia with adequate lung and testes shielding using air foam. We treated the distal ureteral stones of young children in the supine position through greater sciatic foramen and lesser sciatic foramen as the path of shockwave instead of prone position, which is not a comfortable or natural position and could adversely affect cardiopulmonary function especially under general anesthesia. Localization was mainly done by ultrasound, and X-ray was only used to localize ureteral calculi. For follow-up, we have used abdominal ultrasound, plain X-ray, and CT scan if needed to confirm stone disintegration and clearance.

RESULTS

The overall success rate for renal and ureteral calculi was 83.4 and 58.46%, respectively. The re-treatment rate was 4% in renal group and 28% for the ureteral group. No serious complications were recorded in our patients. Minor complications occurred in 15% of our patients; renal colic was reported in 10% of our treated patients, and repeated vomiting was reported in 5% that respond to antiemetics. In the renal group; children with history of pervious urologic surgical procedures had low success rate of stone clearance after ESWL. In the ureteral group stone burden, stone location, had a significant impact on stone clearance outcome.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that SWL in pediatric age group for both renal and ureteral stone is cost effective, safe with an acceptable re-treatment rate; however children with large stone burden or previous urologic surgery have low success rate.

Comparison of three different analgesic protocols during shockwave lithotripsy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) is one of the most important treatment modalities for urinary stone disease. The procedure may cause pain, and patient relaxation and cooperation are crucial in maintaining stone localization for optimal fragmentation and patient comfort during the procedure. As yet, there is not a standard analgesic protocol for patients undergoing SWL. We aimed to use three different analgesic agents and compare their efficacy during SWL in this study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Written informed consents were obtained from 95 patients with kidney stones, and they were randomized to receive lornoxicam (group L, n=32 patients), paracetamol (group P, n=31 patients), and tramadol with a patient-controlled analgesia device (group T, n=32 patients). All groups received patient-controlled analgesia with tramadol during the SWL procedure. The intensity of pain was evaluated with a visual analog scale (VAS).

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 41.87 ± 16.53 years, 44.07 ± 11.48 years, and 41.24 ± 14.82 years in group L, group P, and group T, respectively. No significant differences were found between the three groups concerning patient age, stone location, or session duration (P>0.05). The mean VAS scores and analgesic consumption were lower in group L compared with other groups (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study showed that additional administration of analgesics was decreased with intravenous lornoxicam in comparison with paracetamol and only tramadol.