Loading…
Supine Transgluteal vs Prone Position in Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy of Distal Ureteric Stones
Objective To evaluate of efficacy of transgluteal (supine) approach for shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in treatment of distal ureteric stones. Patients and methods This prospective, randomized, comparative study was conducted on 98 patients. Patients were randomly assigned into 2 groups: group A (n =...
Saved in:
Published in: | Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.) N.J.), 2015-01, Vol.85 (1), p.51-54 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c490t-8bdb7464fcd73db2bb81cef144b44986fdee039474daa0968ebed5d58214443b3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c490t-8bdb7464fcd73db2bb81cef144b44986fdee039474daa0968ebed5d58214443b3 |
container_end_page | 54 |
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 51 |
container_title | Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.) |
container_volume | 85 |
creator | Kamel, Mostafa Salem, Emad A Maarouf, Aref Abdalla, Mohamed Ragab, Ahmed Shahin, Ashraf M.S |
description | Objective To evaluate of efficacy of transgluteal (supine) approach for shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in treatment of distal ureteric stones. Patients and methods This prospective, randomized, comparative study was conducted on 98 patients. Patients were randomly assigned into 2 groups: group A (n = 49; prone position) and group B (n = 49; supine position, transgluteal). Inclusion criteria included patients with radiopaque lower ureteric stones ≤10 mm. Exclusion criteria included radiolucent stones, stones >10 mm, the need for any auxiliary procedure, and any contraindication for SWL. Post-SWL evaluation included plain x-ray of kidney, ureter, and bladder at 2 weeks after treatment and then at monthly intervals after treatment for 3 months. Stone-free status was defined as no residual stone fragments visible on plain x-ray. Treatment failure was defined as persistence of stone fragments at 3 months or the need for ureteroscopy. Results Stone-free rate after 1 treatment session was achieved in 44.9% and 75.5% for prone and supine positions, respectively. Proceeding to ureteroscopy, after failure of the second SWL session to clear the stones, was done in 34.7% and 8.2% for prone and supine positions, respectively. The overall success rate for SWL treatment in prone and supine groups was 65.3% and 91.8%, respectively ( P |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.urology.2014.08.033 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1639978059</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0090429514009662</els_id><sourcerecordid>1639978059</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c490t-8bdb7464fcd73db2bb81cef144b44986fdee039474daa0968ebed5d58214443b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkcFu1DAQhi0EotvCI4By5JIwThwnvoBQKQVpJSptK46WY0-63mbjYDsr9u1xtAsHLpzGGn3zj_wNIW8oFBQof78rZu8G93gsSqCsgLaAqnpGVrQum1wIUT8nKwABOStFfUEuQ9gBAOe8eUkuypoxaEtYke1mnuyI2b1XY3gc5ohqyA4hu_Mude9csNG6MbNjdvMreqWdn5xfmM3W6afshzpgtrZx66K3Uzhmrs8-2xAT8OAxorc628QUFV6RF70aAr4-1yvy8OXm_vprvv5---360zrXTEDM2850DeOs16apTFd2XUs19pSxjjHR8t4gQiVYw4xSIHiLHZra1G2ZEFZ11RV5d8qdvPs5Y4hyb4PGYVAjujlIyishmhZqkdD6hGrvQvDYy8nbvfJHSUEukuVOniXLRbKEVibJae7tecXc7dH8nfpjNQEfTwCmjx4sehm0xVGjsR51lMbZ_6748E-CHuxotRqe8Ihh52Y_JouSylBKkJvl0suhKUsvzsvqNwLCp38</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1639978059</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Supine Transgluteal vs Prone Position in Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy of Distal Ureteric Stones</title><source>Elsevier</source><creator>Kamel, Mostafa ; Salem, Emad A ; Maarouf, Aref ; Abdalla, Mohamed ; Ragab, Ahmed ; Shahin, Ashraf M.S</creator><creatorcontrib>Kamel, Mostafa ; Salem, Emad A ; Maarouf, Aref ; Abdalla, Mohamed ; Ragab, Ahmed ; Shahin, Ashraf M.S</creatorcontrib><description>Objective To evaluate of efficacy of transgluteal (supine) approach for shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in treatment of distal ureteric stones. Patients and methods This prospective, randomized, comparative study was conducted on 98 patients. Patients were randomly assigned into 2 groups: group A (n = 49; prone position) and group B (n = 49; supine position, transgluteal). Inclusion criteria included patients with radiopaque lower ureteric stones ≤10 mm. Exclusion criteria included radiolucent stones, stones >10 mm, the need for any auxiliary procedure, and any contraindication for SWL. Post-SWL evaluation included plain x-ray of kidney, ureter, and bladder at 2 weeks after treatment and then at monthly intervals after treatment for 3 months. Stone-free status was defined as no residual stone fragments visible on plain x-ray. Treatment failure was defined as persistence of stone fragments at 3 months or the need for ureteroscopy. Results Stone-free rate after 1 treatment session was achieved in 44.9% and 75.5% for prone and supine positions, respectively. Proceeding to ureteroscopy, after failure of the second SWL session to clear the stones, was done in 34.7% and 8.2% for prone and supine positions, respectively. The overall success rate for SWL treatment in prone and supine groups was 65.3% and 91.8%, respectively ( P <.001). Conclusion Transgluteal SWL while patient in supine position proved efficacy for treatment of distal ureteric stones. Larger group studies comparing the results of SWL in supine position with those of prone position and also with those of ureteroscopy may enrich our data to reach a consensus for the ideal management of distal ureteric stones.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0090-4295</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1527-9995</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.08.033</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25440820</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Buttocks ; Female ; Humans ; Lithotripsy - adverse effects ; Lithotripsy - methods ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Patient Positioning - methods ; Prone Position ; Prospective Studies ; Supine Position ; Ureteral Calculi - pathology ; Ureteral Calculi - therapy ; Urology</subject><ispartof>Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.), 2015-01, Vol.85 (1), p.51-54</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>2015 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c490t-8bdb7464fcd73db2bb81cef144b44986fdee039474daa0968ebed5d58214443b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c490t-8bdb7464fcd73db2bb81cef144b44986fdee039474daa0968ebed5d58214443b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25440820$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kamel, Mostafa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salem, Emad A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maarouf, Aref</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Abdalla, Mohamed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ragab, Ahmed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shahin, Ashraf M.S</creatorcontrib><title>Supine Transgluteal vs Prone Position in Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy of Distal Ureteric Stones</title><title>Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.)</title><addtitle>Urology</addtitle><description>Objective To evaluate of efficacy of transgluteal (supine) approach for shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in treatment of distal ureteric stones. Patients and methods This prospective, randomized, comparative study was conducted on 98 patients. Patients were randomly assigned into 2 groups: group A (n = 49; prone position) and group B (n = 49; supine position, transgluteal). Inclusion criteria included patients with radiopaque lower ureteric stones ≤10 mm. Exclusion criteria included radiolucent stones, stones >10 mm, the need for any auxiliary procedure, and any contraindication for SWL. Post-SWL evaluation included plain x-ray of kidney, ureter, and bladder at 2 weeks after treatment and then at monthly intervals after treatment for 3 months. Stone-free status was defined as no residual stone fragments visible on plain x-ray. Treatment failure was defined as persistence of stone fragments at 3 months or the need for ureteroscopy. Results Stone-free rate after 1 treatment session was achieved in 44.9% and 75.5% for prone and supine positions, respectively. Proceeding to ureteroscopy, after failure of the second SWL session to clear the stones, was done in 34.7% and 8.2% for prone and supine positions, respectively. The overall success rate for SWL treatment in prone and supine groups was 65.3% and 91.8%, respectively ( P <.001). Conclusion Transgluteal SWL while patient in supine position proved efficacy for treatment of distal ureteric stones. Larger group studies comparing the results of SWL in supine position with those of prone position and also with those of ureteroscopy may enrich our data to reach a consensus for the ideal management of distal ureteric stones.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Buttocks</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Lithotripsy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Lithotripsy - methods</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Patient Positioning - methods</subject><subject>Prone Position</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Supine Position</subject><subject>Ureteral Calculi - pathology</subject><subject>Ureteral Calculi - therapy</subject><subject>Urology</subject><issn>0090-4295</issn><issn>1527-9995</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkcFu1DAQhi0EotvCI4By5JIwThwnvoBQKQVpJSptK46WY0-63mbjYDsr9u1xtAsHLpzGGn3zj_wNIW8oFBQof78rZu8G93gsSqCsgLaAqnpGVrQum1wIUT8nKwABOStFfUEuQ9gBAOe8eUkuypoxaEtYke1mnuyI2b1XY3gc5ohqyA4hu_Mude9csNG6MbNjdvMreqWdn5xfmM3W6afshzpgtrZx66K3Uzhmrs8-2xAT8OAxorc628QUFV6RF70aAr4-1yvy8OXm_vprvv5---360zrXTEDM2850DeOs16apTFd2XUs19pSxjjHR8t4gQiVYw4xSIHiLHZra1G2ZEFZ11RV5d8qdvPs5Y4hyb4PGYVAjujlIyishmhZqkdD6hGrvQvDYy8nbvfJHSUEukuVOniXLRbKEVibJae7tecXc7dH8nfpjNQEfTwCmjx4sehm0xVGjsR51lMbZ_6748E-CHuxotRqe8Ihh52Y_JouSylBKkJvl0suhKUsvzsvqNwLCp38</recordid><startdate>20150101</startdate><enddate>20150101</enddate><creator>Kamel, Mostafa</creator><creator>Salem, Emad A</creator><creator>Maarouf, Aref</creator><creator>Abdalla, Mohamed</creator><creator>Ragab, Ahmed</creator><creator>Shahin, Ashraf M.S</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150101</creationdate><title>Supine Transgluteal vs Prone Position in Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy of Distal Ureteric Stones</title><author>Kamel, Mostafa ; Salem, Emad A ; Maarouf, Aref ; Abdalla, Mohamed ; Ragab, Ahmed ; Shahin, Ashraf M.S</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c490t-8bdb7464fcd73db2bb81cef144b44986fdee039474daa0968ebed5d58214443b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Buttocks</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Lithotripsy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Lithotripsy - methods</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Patient Positioning - methods</topic><topic>Prone Position</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Supine Position</topic><topic>Ureteral Calculi - pathology</topic><topic>Ureteral Calculi - therapy</topic><topic>Urology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kamel, Mostafa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salem, Emad A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maarouf, Aref</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Abdalla, Mohamed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ragab, Ahmed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shahin, Ashraf M.S</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kamel, Mostafa</au><au>Salem, Emad A</au><au>Maarouf, Aref</au><au>Abdalla, Mohamed</au><au>Ragab, Ahmed</au><au>Shahin, Ashraf M.S</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Supine Transgluteal vs Prone Position in Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy of Distal Ureteric Stones</atitle><jtitle>Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.)</jtitle><addtitle>Urology</addtitle><date>2015-01-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>85</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>51</spage><epage>54</epage><pages>51-54</pages><issn>0090-4295</issn><eissn>1527-9995</eissn><abstract>Objective To evaluate of efficacy of transgluteal (supine) approach for shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in treatment of distal ureteric stones. Patients and methods This prospective, randomized, comparative study was conducted on 98 patients. Patients were randomly assigned into 2 groups: group A (n = 49; prone position) and group B (n = 49; supine position, transgluteal). Inclusion criteria included patients with radiopaque lower ureteric stones ≤10 mm. Exclusion criteria included radiolucent stones, stones >10 mm, the need for any auxiliary procedure, and any contraindication for SWL. Post-SWL evaluation included plain x-ray of kidney, ureter, and bladder at 2 weeks after treatment and then at monthly intervals after treatment for 3 months. Stone-free status was defined as no residual stone fragments visible on plain x-ray. Treatment failure was defined as persistence of stone fragments at 3 months or the need for ureteroscopy. Results Stone-free rate after 1 treatment session was achieved in 44.9% and 75.5% for prone and supine positions, respectively. Proceeding to ureteroscopy, after failure of the second SWL session to clear the stones, was done in 34.7% and 8.2% for prone and supine positions, respectively. The overall success rate for SWL treatment in prone and supine groups was 65.3% and 91.8%, respectively ( P <.001). Conclusion Transgluteal SWL while patient in supine position proved efficacy for treatment of distal ureteric stones. Larger group studies comparing the results of SWL in supine position with those of prone position and also with those of ureteroscopy may enrich our data to reach a consensus for the ideal management of distal ureteric stones.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>25440820</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.urology.2014.08.033</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0090-4295 |
ispartof | Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.), 2015-01, Vol.85 (1), p.51-54 |
issn | 0090-4295 1527-9995 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1639978059 |
source | Elsevier |
subjects | Adult Buttocks Female Humans Lithotripsy - adverse effects Lithotripsy - methods Male Middle Aged Patient Positioning - methods Prone Position Prospective Studies Supine Position Ureteral Calculi - pathology Ureteral Calculi - therapy Urology |
title | Supine Transgluteal vs Prone Position in Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy of Distal Ureteric Stones |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T13%3A39%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Supine%20Transgluteal%20vs%20Prone%20Position%20in%20Extracorporeal%20Shock%20Wave%20Lithotripsy%20of%20Distal%20Ureteric%20Stones&rft.jtitle=Urology%20(Ridgewood,%20N.J.)&rft.au=Kamel,%20Mostafa&rft.date=2015-01-01&rft.volume=85&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=51&rft.epage=54&rft.pages=51-54&rft.issn=0090-4295&rft.eissn=1527-9995&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.urology.2014.08.033&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1639978059%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c490t-8bdb7464fcd73db2bb81cef144b44986fdee039474daa0968ebed5d58214443b3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1639978059&rft_id=info:pmid/25440820&rfr_iscdi=true |