ربيع جمعة سيد عمر
أستاذ مساعد
Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery Versus Ultrasound- Guided Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Treating 1-2 cm Radiolucent Lower Calyceal Stones Ashraf M. Abd Elal *, Hussein Shaher, Ehab El-Barky, Saad Ali and Rabea G. Omar
• 2024
معلومات البحث
المؤلفون
, Ashraf M ,Hussein Shaher , . Abd Elal , Ehab El-Barky , Saad Ali , Rabea G. Omar:
الكلمات المفتاحية
Not Available
المجلة العلمية
Not Available
الناشر
Not Available
المجلد
Not Available
العدد
Not Available
الصفحات
Not Available
publication.type
Local
رابط البحث
Not Available
المواد المرفقة
Not Available
الملخص
Objectives: To compare the safety and efficacy of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and ultrasound-guided (US-guided) shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) for the treatment of radiolucent lower pole calculi of 1- 2cm. Materials and Methods: This prospective randomized study was performed at our tertiary care urology institute of Banha University Hospitals; cases were randomized either to undergo RIRS (group A) or US-guided SWL with triple focus system (group B). The safety and effectiveness of both therapies were compared using new criteria for stone-free rate (SFR): Grade A (absolutely stone-free), Grade B (≤2mm fragments), and Grade C (> 2mm up to 4mm
2
fragments), fluoroscopy time, operative time, auxiliary procedures, retreatment, and complications.
Results: Out of 100 patients, 92 were eligible for this study. RIRS had a higher SFR of 88.9% compared to SWL,72.3% (P=0.045). Also, Stone-free classification significantly differed between the studied groups (P < 0.001), with grade A being significantly higher in group A. conversely, grades B and C were lower in group A. On the other hand, operative and fluoroscopy times were significantly reduced with SWL (P = 0.004 and < 0.001, respectively). While complications did not significantly differ between the 2 groups (P = 0.340), a significant distinction was observed in terms of the Clavien-Dindo classification.
Conclusion: RIRS is an effective and safe option for treating radiolucent lower calyceal stones of ≤ 2cm, with a greater SFR and lower need for auxiliary operations. However, Sono SWL is a cost-effective alternative that can achieve a comparable success rate after retreatment sessions.
2
fragments), fluoroscopy time, operative time, auxiliary procedures, retreatment, and complications.
Results: Out of 100 patients, 92 were eligible for this study. RIRS had a higher SFR of 88.9% compared to SWL,72.3% (P=0.045). Also, Stone-free classification significantly differed between the studied groups (P < 0.001), with grade A being significantly higher in group A. conversely, grades B and C were lower in group A. On the other hand, operative and fluoroscopy times were significantly reduced with SWL (P = 0.004 and < 0.001, respectively). While complications did not significantly differ between the 2 groups (P = 0.340), a significant distinction was observed in terms of the Clavien-Dindo classification.
Conclusion: RIRS is an effective and safe option for treating radiolucent lower calyceal stones of ≤ 2cm, with a greater SFR and lower need for auxiliary operations. However, Sono SWL is a cost-effective alternative that can achieve a comparable success rate after retreatment sessions.
