Combined electrohydraulic and holmium: YAG laser ureteroscopic nephrolithotripsy of large (>2 cm) renal calculi

[Ureteroscopy: is it the best?]

Over the last 40 years the treatment of urolithiasis passed from open surgical therapies to minimally invasive approaches. From the introduction of the first ureteroscopes in '80s many technological improvements allowed to reduce endourological instruments' size, ensuring in the meanwhile an increasingly high success rate in the resolution of the urolithiasis. The purpose of the study is to review the current role of the ureteroscopy(URS) in the treatment of urinary stones. A non-systematic review was performed considering the most recent Guidelines and results from Literature. The results confirm that, considering ureteral calculi, the stone-free rate (SFR) for URS is significantly higher than for ESWL in the treatment of distal ureteral stones <10 mm and >10 mm. Endoscopy has a first-line role also in the treatment of proximal ureteral stones >10 mm, together with ESWL. Retreatment rate and ancillary procedures are also lower in patients treated with URS, despite it is more invasive if compared with ESWL. Recent data are available in Literature about the treatment of nephrolithiasis with Retrograde Intra-Renal Surgery (RIRS). RIRS is the first-line treatment, together with ESWL, for stones <20 mm, and second choice for stones >20 mm. However, for large renal stones the role of RIRS is still being discussed. In conclusion, the majority of urinary stones can be treated by rigid or flexible URS. Further studies are required to clarify the role of endoscopy in the treatment of large stones, especially if compared to percutaneous approaches.

Flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy for stones >2 cm: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Urinary stones >2 cm are traditionally managed with percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Recently, flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy) (FURSL) has been used to manage them with comparable results. In a comparative study of renal stones between 2 and 3 cm, FURSL was reported to need less second-stage procedures and be just as effective as PCNL. Our purpose was to review the literature for renal stones >2 cm managed by ureteroscopy and holmium lasertripsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review and quantitative meta-analysis was performed using studies identified by a literature search from 1990s (the first reported large renal stones treated ureteroscopically) to August 2011. All English language articles reporting on a minimum of 10 patients treated with FURSL for renal stones >2 cm were included. Two reviewers independently extracted the data from each study. The data of studies with comparable results were included into a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

In nine studies, 445 patients (460 renal units) were reportedly treated with FURSL. The mean operative time was 82.5 minutes (28-215 min). The mean stone-free rate was 93.7% (77%-96.7%), with an average of 1.6 procedures per patient. The mean stone size was 2.5 cm. An overall complication rate was 10.1%. Major complications developed in 21 (5.3%) patients and minor complications developed in 19 (4.8%) patients. A subgroup analysis shows that FURSL has a 95.7% stone-free rate with stones 2-3 cm and 84.6% in those >3 cm (P=0.01), with a minor complication rate of 14.3% and 15.4%, respectively, and a major complication rate of 0% and 11.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In experienced hands, FURSL can successfully treat patients with stones >2 cm with a high stone-free rate and a low complication rate. Although the studies are from high-volume experienced centers and may not be sufficient to alter everyday routine practice, this review has shown that the efficacy of FURSL allows an alternative to PCNL.

Ureteroscopic treatment of larger renal calculi (>2 cm)

Objectives

To evaluate the current status of ureteroscopic lithotripsy (UL) for treating renal calculi of >2 cm, as advances in flexible ureteroscope design, accessory instrumentation and lithotrites have revolutionised the treatment of urinary calculi. While previously reserved for ureteric and small renal calculi, UL has gained an increasing role in the selective management of larger renal stone burdens.

Methods

We searched the available databases, including PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus, for relevant reports in English, and the article bibliographies to identify additional relevant articles. Keywords included ureteroscopy, lithotripsy, renal calculi, and calculi >2 cm. Retrieved articles were reviewed to consider the number of patients, mean stone size, success rates, indications and complications.

Results

In all, nine studies (417 patients) were eligible for inclusion. After one, two or three procedures the mean (range) success rates were 68.2 (23–84)%, 87.1 (79–91)% and 94.4 (90.1–96.7)%, respectively. Overall, the success rate was >90% with a mean of 1.2–2.3 procedures per patient. The overall complication rate was 10.3%, including six (1.4%) intraoperative and 37 (8.9%) postoperative complications, most of which were minor. The most common indications for UL were a failed previous treatment (46%), comorbidities (18.2%), and technical and anatomical factors (12.3%).

Conclusions

UL is safe and effective for treating large renal calculi. While several procedures might be required for total stone clearance, UL should be considered a standard approach in the urologist’s options treating renal calculi of >2 cm.

Influence of Ureteral Stone Components on the Outcomes of Electrohydraulic Lithotripsy

Purpose

We evaluated the influence of urinary stone components on the outcomes of ureteroscopic removal of stones (URS) by electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) in patients with distal ureteral stones.

Materials and Methods

Patients with a single distal ureteral stone with a stone size of 0.5 to 2.0 cm that was completely removed by use of EHL were included in the study. Operating time was defined as the time interval between ureteroscope insertion and complete removal of ureteral stones. Ureteral stones were classified into 5 categories on the basis of their main component (that accounting for 50% or more of the stone content) as follows: calcium oxalate monohydrate (COM), calcium oxalate dihydrate, carbonate apatite (CAP), uric acid (UA), and struvite (ST).

Results

A total of 193 patients (131 males and 62 females) underwent EHL. The mean operating time was 25.1±8.2 minutes and the mean stone size was 1.15±0.44 cm. Calcium oxalate stones accounted for 64.8% of all ureteral stones, followed by UA (19.7%), CAP (8.3%), and ST (7.2%) stones. The mean operating time was significantly longer in the UA group (28.6±8.3 minutes) than in the COM group (24.0±7.8 minutes, p=0.04). In multivariate analyses, the stone size was negatively associated with the odds ratio (OR) for successful fragmentation. UA as a main component (OR, 0.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.20 to 0.89; p=0.023) was also found to be significantly important as a negative predictive factor of successful fragmentation after adjustment for stone size.

Conclusions

The results of the present study suggest that successful fragmentation by URS with EHL could be associated with the proportion of the UA component.

A comparison of treatment modalities for renal calculi between 100 and 300 mm2: are shockwave lithotripsy, ureteroscopy, and percutaneous nephrolithotomy equivalent?

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) is considered a standard treatment for patients with upper-tract stones that are less than 10 mm in diameter, whereas stones that are larger than 20 mm are best managed by percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). The management of stones between these sizes remains controversial. Our purpose was to review our contemporary series of SWL, ureteroscopy (URS), and PCNL outcomes for intermediate-sized upper tract calculi (100-300 mm(2)).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Analysis was restricted to those patients who were treated for a renal calculus that measured between 100 and 300 mm(2) during a 4-year span. Demographic, stone, patient, treatment, and follow-up data were collected from a prospectively maintained database.

RESULTS

A total of 137 patients were referred with nonstaghorn calculi with an area between 100 and 300 mm(2). Fifty-three (38.7%) patients were treated with SWL, while 41 (29.9%) and 43 (31.4%) underwent ureteroscopy and PCNL, respectively. Mean stone area was higher in the PCNL group (P < 0.001), whereas stone density was higher for patients undergoing SWL (P = 0.002). Single treatment success rates were better for PCNL at 95.3%,vs 87.8% for ureteroscopy and 60.4% for SWL, P < 0.001. When allowing for two SWL treatments, the success rate improved to 79.2%, thus equalizing the success of the three treatment modalities (P = 0.66). Auxiliary treatments were more common after SWL (42.3%; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

For intermediate-sized upper-tract stones, when allowing for up to two SWL treatments, there was no significant difference between treatment modalities. Thus, SWL is a reasonably successful treatment alternative for patients who are not fit for a general anesthetic or who prefer SWL over competing treatments, provided they accept a potentially higher number of treatments.