Image not available

Lee JY et al, 2011: Evaluation of the optimal frequency of and pretreatment with shock waves in patients with renal stones

Lee JY, Moon YT
Department of Urology, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea


Abstract

PURPOSE: Many studies have been carried out to increase the success rate of shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) and to reduce renal injury. We investigated the success rate after one session as well as urine N-acetyl-β-d-glucosaminidase (NAG) levels for the evaluation of renal injury according to shock wave frequency and pretreatment with low-energy shock waves during SWL.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study targeted 48 patients with renal stones who had undergone SWL. Patients were sequentially allocated into four groups according to shock wave frequency (60 or 120 shocks/min) and whether pretreatment had occurred. We documented total SWL operating number, success rate after first SWL, urine NAG, compliance, and the total cost for each patient.

RESULTS: There were 32 males and 16 females with an average age of 51.6 years. The average stone size was 7.06 mm, and there was no significant difference in stone size between the groups. The data showed that patients treated with a frequency of 60 shocks/min had a lower mean number of SWL sessions, 1.36 sessions for 60 shocks/min and 2.0 sessions for 120 shocks/min, respectively, which was statistically significant (p<0.05). When comparing NAG/creatinin ratios before and after SWL between those with and without pretreatment, there was no significant difference according to pretreatment (p=0.406).

CONCLUSIONS: SWL treatment at a frequency of 60 shocks/min yielded better outcomes, such as a lower number of SWL sessions, and had an increased success rate compared with SWL at 120 shocks/min. On the other hand, pretreatment did not impact renal injury. Therefore, SWL treatment at a frequency of 60 shocks/min could improve treatment efficacy more than that for SWL at 120 shocks/min.

Korean J Urol. 2011 Nov;52(11):776-81. doi: 10.4111/kju.2011.52.11.776. Epub 2011 Nov 17PMID: 22195268 [PubMed - in process]PMCID: PMC3242992

Rate this blog entry:
0
 

Comments 1

Peter Alken on Friday, 30 September 2011 07:47

I have read that paper several times but did not understand it. 48 patients were treated and split into 4 groups with 25, 23 24 and 24 patients resp. As was to be expected the success rate of ESWL was better in group I with 60 shocks/min than in group II with 120 shocks/min. In Group III and IV – treated with which shock wave frequency? - pretreatment with 500 shocks low-energy shock waves and 3 minutes of waiting time had no significant impact on the difference of renal trauma determined by urinary NAG levels. The authors mentioned costs in their manuscript but did not give any data on that aspect.

Peter Alken

I have read that paper several times but did not understand it. 48 patients were treated and split into 4 groups with 25, 23 24 and 24 patients resp. As was to be expected the success rate of ESWL was better in group I with 60 shocks/min than in group II with 120 shocks/min. In Group III and IV – treated with which shock wave frequency? - pretreatment with 500 shocks low-energy shock waves and 3 minutes of waiting time had no significant impact on the difference of renal trauma determined by urinary NAG levels. The authors mentioned costs in their manuscript but did not give any data on that aspect. Peter Alken
Guest
Friday, 26 May 2017
STORZ MEDICAL AG
Lohstampfestrasse 8
8274 Tägerwilen
Switzerland
Tel.: +41 (0)71 677 45 45
Fax: +41 (0)71 677 45 05

www.storzmedical.com
Personal data
Address
Contact data
Message