Switch to
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| lifeskim:mentions | |
| pubmed:issue |
1
|
| pubmed:dateCreated |
1988-10-5
|
| pubmed:abstractText |
Either transurethral ureteroscopy (URS) or extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) was the primary method of intervention in two series of patients presenting consecutively with stones located in the ureter distal to the radiological marking of the sacroiliac joint. Of 65 patients treated by URS, successful evacuation of the major part of the stone was achieved in 97% in one or two sessions. Of those subsequently attending for review, 93% proved stone-free but 3% required surgery for serious complications. In the ESWL series of 53 patients, successful stone fragmentation was recorded in 94%, with 2 patients requiring a supplementary endourological or surgical procedure. No significant complications were related to ESWL and 90% of those followed up after successful ESWL proved stone-free at 6 weeks. In uncomplicated cases, the mean procedure time for ESWL was one-third of that required for URS and the hospital stay one-half. It is suggested that ESWL should be the primary method of intervention in patients with distal ureteric stone, with URS reserved for the small number that prove refractory to such treatment.
|
| pubmed:language |
eng
|
| pubmed:journal | |
| pubmed:citationSubset |
IM
|
| pubmed:status |
MEDLINE
|
| pubmed:month |
Jul
|
| pubmed:issn |
0007-1331
|
| pubmed:author | |
| pubmed:issnType |
Print
|
| pubmed:volume |
62
|
| pubmed:owner |
NLM
|
| pubmed:authorsComplete |
Y
|
| pubmed:pagination |
13-8
|
| pubmed:dateRevised |
2004-11-17
|
| pubmed:meshHeading | |
| pubmed:year |
1988
|
| pubmed:articleTitle |
Primary choice of intervention for distal ureteric stone: ureteroscopy or ESWL?
|
| pubmed:affiliation |
Department of Surgery (Urology), King Khalid University Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
|
| pubmed:publicationType |
Journal Article
|