Entity

Time filter

Source Type


Karakan T.,Saglk Bakanlg Ankara Egitim Ve Arastrma Hastanesi Sukriye Mh. | Diri A.,Saglk Bakanlg Ankara Egitim Ve Arastrma Hastanesi Sukriye Mh. | Hascicek A.M.,Saglk Bakanlg Ankara Egitim Ve Arastrma Hastanesi Sukriye Mh. | Ozgur B.C.,Saglk Bakanlg Ankara Egitim Ve Arastrma Hastanesi Sukriye Mh. | And 2 more authors.
The Scientific World Journal | Year: 2013

Objectives. To compare the effectiveness and safety of ultrasonic and pneumatic lithotripters in the treatment of renal stone disease. Materials and Methods. A total of 227 consecutive percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures for renal calculi were performed. In 107 patients ultrasonic lithotriptors were used (group I) and in 83 patients pneumatic lithotriptors were used (group II). In the remaining 37 patients, stones were managed with both pneumatic and ultrasonic lithotripters. Follow-up studies included intravenous urography (IVU) and/or computed tomography (CT). Results. The mean operative time and duration of hospitalization were similar between the groups. In the ultrasonic treatment group, 100 (96.9%) patients were stone-free on postoperative day 1 and 5 (4.6%) went on to undergo an additional treatment modality, resulting in a total stone-free rate of 97.2%. In the pneumatic lithotripsy group, 68 (81.9%) patients were stone-free after the primary procedure on the first day and 15 (18.1%) went on to undergo an additional treatment modality, resulting in a stone-free rate of 91.5%. The final stone-free rates at 3 months postoperatively in groups I, II, and III were 97.2%, 91.5%, and 87.9%, respectively (P = 0.826). Conclusions. We conclude that both ultrasonic and pneumatic lithotripters are effective and safe for intracorporeal lithotripsy. However, the ultrasonic lithotripter provides higher stone-free rates with similar morbidity compared with pneumatic devices. © 2013 Tolga Karakan et al. Source

Discover hidden collaborations