» Articles » PMID: 28299446

Do Renal Stones That Fail Lithotripsy Require Treatment?

Overview
Journal Urolithiasis
Publisher Springer
Specialty Urology
Date 2017 Mar 17
PMID 28299446
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The rates of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) appear stable in the UK. However, there is little evidence on the natural history of these calculi if SWL fails. We set to look at the effectiveness of SWL in patients with a single, previously untreated renal stone and the natural history of those stones that failed treatment. We retrospectively reviewed all data from our prospectively collected database of patients undergoing a first treatment for a single renal stone between October 2010 and November 2013. Outcomes after SWL were categorised as success, subsequent intervention needed or conservative management. The medical records of patients managed conservatively were reviewed to determine whether further intervention was required and why. We further sought to define, in those patients where SWL failed, whether subsequent active intervention was needed. For the remainder, we examined whether conservative management was a reasonable management option. 313 patients fitted the inclusion criteria. Of these, 144 were treated successfully. Of the 170 patients with a residual stone, 51 went on to flexible ureteroscopy directly at their next clinical review mainly due to persistent symptoms. 79 patients were managed conservatively, and for 39 follow-up data were unavailable as their follow-up was at a different hospital. 63 patients (80%) were successfully managed conservatively with no recurrence of symptoms over the follow-up period (mean 2 years 4 months). 16 (20%) patients that were initially managed conservatively required subsequent intervention. Of these, 87% had a stone in an upper pole calyx. Conservative management of renal stones after failed SWL is a suitable option for asymptomatic patients with stones not located in the upper pole. For patients with upper pole stones, early intervention is warranted due to the high risk of requiring intervention.

Citing Articles

Follow-up of urolithiasis patients after treatment: an algorithm from the EAU Urolithiasis Panel.

Lombardo R, Tzelves L, Geraghty R, Davis N, Neisius A, Petrik A World J Urol. 2024; 42(1):202.

PMID: 38546854 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-04872-y.


Optimal Delivery of Follow-Up Care for the Prevention of Stone Recurrence in Urolithiasis Patients: Improving Outcomes.

Tzelves L, Berdempes M, Mourmouris P, Mitsogiannis I, Skolarikos A Res Rep Urol. 2022; 14:141-148.

PMID: 35469244 PMC: 9034870. DOI: 10.2147/RRU.S277498.


The utility of automated volume analysis of renal stones before and after shockwave lithotripsy treatment.

Cui H, Tan T, Christiansen F, Osther P, Turney B Urolithiasis. 2020; 49(3):219-226.

PMID: 32926195 PMC: 8113220. DOI: 10.1007/s00240-020-01212-8.

References
1.
Neisius A, Wollner J, Thomas C, Roos F, Brenner W, Hampel C . Treatment efficacy and outcomes using a third generation shockwave lithotripter. BJU Int. 2013; 112(7):972-81. DOI: 10.1111/bju.12159. View

2.
Boyce C, Pickhardt P, Lawrence E, Kim D, Bruce R . Prevalence of urolithiasis in asymptomatic adults: objective determination using low dose noncontrast computerized tomography. J Urol. 2010; 183(3):1017-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2009.11.047. View

3.
Koh L, Ng F, Ng K . Outcomes of long-term follow-up of patients with conservative management of asymptomatic renal calculi. BJU Int. 2011; 109(4):622-5. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10329.x. View

4.
Johnson C, Wilson D, OFallon W, Malek R, Kurland L . Renal stone epidemiology: a 25-year study in Rochester, Minnesota. Kidney Int. 1979; 16(5):624-31. DOI: 10.1038/ki.1979.173. View

5.
Turk C, Petrik A, Sarica K, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, Straub M . EAU Guidelines on Diagnosis and Conservative Management of Urolithiasis. Eur Urol. 2015; 69(3):468-74. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.040. View