Efficacy and Safety of External Physical Vibration Lithecbole After Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy or Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Urinary Stone: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chi Yuan ◽  
Zhongyu Jian ◽  
Xi Jin ◽  
Yucheng Ma ◽  
Hong Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Shock Wave ◽  
Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy ◽  
Shock Wave Lithotripsy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Urinary Stone ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery ◽  
Extracorporeal Shock Wave

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy, Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery, and Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Treatment of Renal Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Medicina ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 26
Author(s):  
Chan Hee Kim ◽  
Doo Yong Chung ◽  
Koon Ho Rha ◽  
Joo Yong Lee ◽  
Seon Heui Lee
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Shock Wave ◽  
Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy ◽  
Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy ◽  
Shock Wave Lithotripsy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Renal Stones ◽  
Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery ◽  
Extracorporeal Shock Wave ◽  
Significant Difference

Background and objectives: To perform a updated systematic review and meta-analysis comparing effectiveness of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for treatment of renal stones (RS). Materials and Methods: A total of 37 studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis about effectiveness to treat RS. Endpoints were stone-free rates (SFR), incidence of auxiliary procedure, retreatment, and complications. We also conducted a sub-analysis of ≥2 cm stones. Results: First, PCNL had the highest SFR than others regardless of stone sizes and RIRS showed a higher SFR than ESWL in <2 cm stones. Second, auxiliary procedures were higher in ESWL than others, and it did not differ between PCNL and RIRS. Finally, in <2 cm stones, the retreatment rate of ESWL was higher than others. RIRS required significantly more retreatment procedures than PCNL in ≥2 cm stones. Complication was higher in PCNL than others, but there was no statistically significant difference in complications between RIRS and PCNL in ≥2 cm stones. For ≥2 cm stones, PCNL had the highest SFR, and auxiliary procedures and retreatment rates were significantly lower than others. Conclusions: We suggest that PCNL is a safe and effective treatment, especially for large RS.

Local anesthetics versus systemic analgesics for reducing pain during Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL): A systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 270-278
Author(s):  
Tetuka Bagus Laksita ◽  
◽  
Mohammad Ayodhia Soebadi ◽  
Soetojo Wirjopranoto ◽  
Furqan Hidayatullah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Shock Wave ◽  
Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy ◽  
Local Anesthetics ◽  
Shock Wave Lithotripsy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Extracorporeal Shock Wave
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document