Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy in proximal ureteric calculus of 10 to 20 mm in size: a single centre experience

OBJECTIVE. To investigate the efficacy of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) and ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy (URS) treatment of upper ureteric stones between 10 to 20 mm in size. From January 2020 to January 2023, 75 patients were treated for proximal ureteric calculus between using ESW...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Pushpanathan, Mugialan, Fahmy, Omar Ahmed, Siang, Christopher Lee Kheng, Khairul-Asri, Mohd Ghani
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Pavlov University 2023
Online Access:http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/120381/
http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/120381/1/120381.pdf
_version_ 1848868174385119232
author Pushpanathan, Mugialan
Fahmy, Omar Ahmed
Siang, Christopher Lee Kheng
Khairul-Asri, Mohd Ghani
author_facet Pushpanathan, Mugialan
Fahmy, Omar Ahmed
Siang, Christopher Lee Kheng
Khairul-Asri, Mohd Ghani
author_sort Pushpanathan, Mugialan
building UPM Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description OBJECTIVE. To investigate the efficacy of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) and ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy (URS) treatment of upper ureteric stones between 10 to 20 mm in size. From January 2020 to January 2023, 75 patients were treated for proximal ureteric calculus between using ESWL (n=40) & URS (n=35). METHODS AND MATERIALS. Both groups were compared regarding operative time, success rate and complications who underwent treatment for proximal ureteric calculus of 10–20 mm in diameter. URS group was observed to have higher stone-free rate, compared to the ESWL group, 31 (88.6 %) vs 20 patients (50.0 %) (p<0.001). RESULTS. URS treatment had a higher complication rate compared to the ESWL, 9 (25.7 %) vs 3(7.5 %);(p=0.032). Procedure time for URS was longer, compared to the ESWL, median (IQR) for URS vs ESWL were 78.0 (65.0, 100.0) vs 62.0 (48.0, 67.0) minutes; (p<0.001). CONCLUSION. We conclude that URS has a better stone-free rate in comparison to a single session of ESWL for upper ureteral calculus of 10–20 mm, with higher complication rates such as post-operative fever and pain. © 2023 Pavlov University. All rights reserved.
first_indexed 2025-11-15T14:48:12Z
format Article
id upm-120381
institution Universiti Putra Malaysia
institution_category Local University
language English
last_indexed 2025-11-15T14:48:12Z
publishDate 2023
publisher Pavlov University
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling upm-1203812025-10-01T02:21:38Z http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/120381/ Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy in proximal ureteric calculus of 10 to 20 mm in size: a single centre experience Pushpanathan, Mugialan Fahmy, Omar Ahmed Siang, Christopher Lee Kheng Khairul-Asri, Mohd Ghani OBJECTIVE. To investigate the efficacy of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) and ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy (URS) treatment of upper ureteric stones between 10 to 20 mm in size. From January 2020 to January 2023, 75 patients were treated for proximal ureteric calculus between using ESWL (n=40) & URS (n=35). METHODS AND MATERIALS. Both groups were compared regarding operative time, success rate and complications who underwent treatment for proximal ureteric calculus of 10–20 mm in diameter. URS group was observed to have higher stone-free rate, compared to the ESWL group, 31 (88.6 %) vs 20 patients (50.0 %) (p<0.001). RESULTS. URS treatment had a higher complication rate compared to the ESWL, 9 (25.7 %) vs 3(7.5 %);(p=0.032). Procedure time for URS was longer, compared to the ESWL, median (IQR) for URS vs ESWL were 78.0 (65.0, 100.0) vs 62.0 (48.0, 67.0) minutes; (p<0.001). CONCLUSION. We conclude that URS has a better stone-free rate in comparison to a single session of ESWL for upper ureteral calculus of 10–20 mm, with higher complication rates such as post-operative fever and pain. © 2023 Pavlov University. All rights reserved. Pavlov University 2023 Article PeerReviewed text en http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/120381/1/120381.pdf Pushpanathan, Mugialan and Fahmy, Omar Ahmed and Siang, Christopher Lee Kheng and Khairul-Asri, Mohd Ghani (2023) Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy in proximal ureteric calculus of 10 to 20 mm in size: a single centre experience. Grekov's Bulletin of Surgery, 182 (6). pp. 27-31. ISSN 0042-4625; eISSN: 2686-7370 https://www.vestnik-grekova.ru/jour/article/view/2362 10.24884/0042-4625-2023-182-6-27-31
spellingShingle Pushpanathan, Mugialan
Fahmy, Omar Ahmed
Siang, Christopher Lee Kheng
Khairul-Asri, Mohd Ghani
Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy in proximal ureteric calculus of 10 to 20 mm in size: a single centre experience
title Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy in proximal ureteric calculus of 10 to 20 mm in size: a single centre experience
title_full Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy in proximal ureteric calculus of 10 to 20 mm in size: a single centre experience
title_fullStr Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy in proximal ureteric calculus of 10 to 20 mm in size: a single centre experience
title_full_unstemmed Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy in proximal ureteric calculus of 10 to 20 mm in size: a single centre experience
title_short Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy in proximal ureteric calculus of 10 to 20 mm in size: a single centre experience
title_sort extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy in proximal ureteric calculus of 10 to 20 mm in size: a single centre experience
url http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/120381/
http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/120381/
http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/120381/
http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/120381/1/120381.pdf