Advertisement
You are prohibited from using or uploading content you accessed through this website into external applications, bots, software, or websites, including those using artificial intelligence technologies and infrastructure, including deep learning, machine learning and large language models and generative AI.

Minimal emphasis has been placed on the clinical sequelae of residual stone fragments following shock wave lithotripsy. Moreover, there are no studies investigating the role of medical therapy on the course of stone disease in patients with residual fragments.

In this retrospective, nonrandomized review, we evaluated 80 patients who had undergone shock wave lithotripsy at various institutions in Texas and were referred to our mineral metabolism clinic for metabolic evaluation and medical management of the stone disease. Of the patients 31 were determined to be stone-free following lithotripsy, while 49 had residual stone fragments. All patients were contacted an average of 43.2 months (range 9 to 79) following shock wave lithotripsy and the radiographs were reviewed.

Patients were placed into 4 groups after shock wave lithotripsy: stone-free or residual fragments on or off medical therapy. In the stone-free group (19 patients), medical treatment produced a significant decrease in stone formation from a median of 0.67 to 0.0 stones per patient per year (p <0.001). In 36 patients with residual fragments stone formation before shock wave lithotripsy was higher than in the stone-free group but there was also a significant decrease in the stone formation rate from a median of 2.47 to 0.00 stones per patient per year while on medical therapy (p <0.001). Of the 12 stone-free patients who did not remain on medical therapy there was a slight decrease in the stone formation rate from a mean of 0.83 to 0.40 stones per patient per year, although this decrease was not significant (p = 0.07). In 13 patients with residual fragments not on medical treatment there was only a minimal decrease in the stone formation rate from a median of 1.33 to 0.77 stones per patient per year (p = 0.06).

We also assessed the significance of so-called clinically insignificant residual fragments (smaller than 5 mm.) following shock wave lithotripsy in 26 of the 36 patients with residual fragments. More than half of the 26 patients with clinically insignificant fragments in the group that did not continue on medical therapy demonstrated significant stone growth during followup, suggesting that these fragments were not insignificant. Moreover, only 16% of the patients with fragments smaller than 5 mm. demonstrated an increase in fragment size while on medical therapy, again suggesting that appropriate medical treatment can decrease the risk of recurrent stone formation or growth (p <0.05).

Our findings suggest that appropriate medical therapy may control active stone formation in patients with or without residual stone fragments following shock wave lithotripsy. Moreover, residual fragments after shock wave lithotripsy place patients at higher risk for recurrent stone formation or growth.

References

  • 1 : First clinical experience with extracorporeally induced destruction of kidney stones by shock waves. J. Urol.1982; 127: 417. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 2 : Percutaneous nephrolithotomy. An approach to branched and staghorn renal calculi. J.A.M.A.1983; 250: 73. Google Scholar
  • 3 : Two-year follow-up of patients treated with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J. Endourol.1988; 2: 163. Google Scholar
  • 4 : Five-year follow-up of urinary stone patients treated with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J. Endourol.1988; 2: 157. Google Scholar
  • 5 : Long-term followup in 1,003 extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy patients. J. Urol.1988; 140: 479. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 6 : Effect of lithotripsy on stone-forming risk factors. J. Urol.1989; 141: 207A. abstract 151. Google Scholar
  • 7 : Metabolic evaluation in stone patients in relation to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy treatment. J. Urol.1991; 146: 1478. AbstractGoogle Scholar
  • 8 : Is selective therapy of recurrent nephrolithiasis possible? Amer. J. Med.1981; 71: 615. Google Scholar
  • 9 : Renal calculi: pathogenesis, diagnosis, and medical therapy. Sem. Nephrol.1992; 12: 200. Google Scholar
  • 10 : Medical management of nephrolithiasis. J. Urol.1982; 128: 1157. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 11 : Ambulatory evaluation of nephrolithiasis: classification, clinical presentation and diagnostic criteria. Amer. J. Med.1980; 69: 19. Google Scholar
  • 12 : Evidence justifying a high fluid intake in treatment of nephrolithiasis. Ann. Intern. Med.1980; 93: 36. Google Scholar
  • 13 : Dietary management of idiopathic calcium urolithiasis. J. Urol.1984; 131: 850. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 14 : Long-term treatment of calcium nephrolithiasis with potassium citrate. J. Urol.1985; 134: 11. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 15 : Management of cystine nephrolithiasis with alpha-mercaptopropionylglycine. J. Urol.1986; 136: 1003. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 16 : The fate of residual fragments after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J. Endourol.1992; 6: 217. Google Scholar
  • 17 : Long-term followup after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy treatment of kidney stones in solitary kidneys. J. Urol.1992; 148: 1011. part 2. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 18 : Treatment philosophy and retreatment rates following piezoelectric lithotripsy. J. Urol.1993; 149: 12. AbstractGoogle Scholar
  • 19 : Economic impact of kidney stones in white male adults. Urology1984; 24: 327. Google Scholar
  • 20 : Percutaneous nephrostolithotomy vs open surgery for renal calculi. A comparative study. J.A.M.A.1985; 254: 1054. Google Scholar
  • 21 : Comparison of the costs and morbidity of percutaneous and open flank procedures. J. Urol.1986; 135: 1150. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 22 : Incidence and economic factors in urolithiasis. In: Stone Disease: Diagnosis and Management. Edited by . Orlando: Grune & Stratton, Inc.1987: 3. chapt. 1. Google Scholar
  • 23 : Cost-effectiveness study of the extracorporeal shock-wave lithotriptor. Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care1990; 6: 623. Google Scholar
  • 24 : Medical management of nephrolithiasis in Dallas: update 1987. J. Urol.1988; 140: 461. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 25 : Incidence of upper urinary tract stones. Min. Electrolyte Metab.1987; 13: 220. Google Scholar
  • 26 : The current role of medical treatment of nephrolithiasis: the impact of improved techniques of stone removal. J. Urol.1985; 134: 6. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 27 : The case for a more aggressive approach to staghorn stones. J. Urol.1976; 115: 505. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 28 : Percutaneous removal of kidney stones: review of 1,000 cases. J. Urol.1985; 134: 1077. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 29 : Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: the Methodist Hospital of Indiana experience. J. Urol.1986; 135: 1134. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 30 : Report of the United States cooperative study of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J. Urol.1986; 135: 1127. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 31 : Methodology, results and complications in 2000 extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy procedures. Brit. J. Urol.1988; 61: 9. Google Scholar
  • 32 : Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy monotherapy for staghorn stones with the second generation lithotriptors. J. Urol.1990; 143: 252. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 33 : The fate of residual fragments after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy monotherapy of infection stones. J. Urol.1991; 145: 6. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 34 : Staghorn stone treatment with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy monotherapy: long-term results. J. Endourol.1991; 5: 45. Google Scholar
  • 35 : Potential for inter-observer and intra-observer variability in x-ray review to establish stone-free rates after lithotripsy. J. Urol.1992; 147: 559. AbstractGoogle Scholar
  • 36 : Prospective comparison of plain abdominal radiography with conventional and digital renal tomography in assessing renal extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy patients. J. Urol.1990; 144: 1341. LinkGoogle Scholar

From the Division of Urology, Department of Surgery and Center for Mineral Metabolism and Clinical Research, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas. Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. Urologische Klinik, Der Universitat Wien, Wien, Austria

Advertisement