The Effect of Shock Wave Lithotripsy on Male and Female Sexual Dysfunction in Patients with Proximal Ureteral Stones

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Arif Kalkanli ◽  
Cem Tugrul Gezmis

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> This study aims to investigate the effects of shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) treatment for proximal ureteral stones on the sexual functions of patients of both genders. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> In this prospective study, 30 female and 72 male patients who had received SWL treatment for proximal ureteral stones in our clinic between August 2019 and October 2020 were evaluated. CT, creatinine, urinary analysis, and culture were performed during the initial consultation for all patients. Information regarding the age, BMI, and stone burden of the patients was recorded. Male patients answered the International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5) questionnaire, and female participants answered the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) 3 times: pre-procedural and post-procedural first and third month. CT was repeated on the first month, and any residues were noted. <b><i>Results:</i></b> The mean IIEF-5 scores of the male patients were 23.11 ± 8.11 prior to surgery, and it decreased to 19.74 ± 7.65 in the first month and 23.88 ± 9.23 in the third, <i>p</i> = 0.001. The mean FSFI scores of female patients were 18.2 ± 9.9, which decreased to 12.8 ± 6.12 in the first month and 17.8 ± 8.66 in the third, <i>p</i> = 0.001. Univariate analysis revealed that the patients’ age (male: <i>p</i> = 0.004 and female: <i>p</i> = 0.008) and BMI (male: <i>p</i> = 0.044 and female: <i>p</i> = 0.027) were related to the poorer scores for both genders. However, there were not any significant findings regarding stone burden (male: <i>p</i> = 0.054 and female: <i>p</i> = 0.078). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> The possibility of developing temporary sexual dysfunction should be taken into account for patients who are candidates for SWL treatment. As the patient’s age and BMI increase, SWL-related sexual dysfunction becomes more severe.

2006 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 171-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarel Halachmi ◽  
Shimon Meretyk

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (11-12) ◽  
pp. 673 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ufuk Ozturk ◽  
Nevzat Can Şener ◽  
H.N. Goksel Goktug ◽  
Adnan Gucuk ◽  
Ismail Nalbant ◽  
...  

Introduction: In this study we compare the success rates and complication rates of shock wave lithotripsy (SWL), laparoscopic, and ureteroscopic approaches for large (between 1 and 2 cm) proximal ureteral stones.Methods: In total, 151 patients with ureteral stones between 1 and 2 cm in diameter were randomized into 3 groups (52 SWL, 51 laparoscopy and 48 retrograde intrarenal surgery [RIRS]). The groups were compared for stone size, success rates, and complication rates using the modified Clavien grading system.Results: Stone burden of the groups were similar (p = 0.36). The success rates were 96%, 81% and 79%, respectively in the laparoscopy, SWL, and ureteroscopy groups. The success rate in laparoscopy group was significantly higher (p < 0.05). When these groups were compared for complication rates, RIRS seemed to bethe group with the lowest complication rates (4.11%) (p < 0.05). SWL and laparoscopy seem to have similar rates of complication (7.06% and 7.86%, respectively, p = 0.12).Interpretation: To our knowledge, this is the first study to compare the results of laparoscopy, SWL and RIRS in ureteral stones. Our results showed that in management of patients with upper ureteral stones between 1 and 2 cm, laparoscopy is the most successful method based on its stone-free rates and acceptable complication rates. However, the limitations of our study are lack of hospital stay and cost-effectiveness data. Also, studies conducted on larger populations should support our findings. When a less invasive method is the only choice, SWL and flexible ureterorenoscopy methods have similar success rates. RIRS, however, has a lower complication rate than the other approaches.


2015 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 676-682 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ozgur Yazici ◽  
Murat Tuncer ◽  
Cahit Sahin ◽  
Mehmet K. Demirkol ◽  
Alper Kafkasli ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document