scholarly journals A Prospective Longitudinal Study onthe Predictability of Quadruple-D Score in the Success Rate of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Renal Stones 1-2cm in Diameter

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Soumish Sengupta ◽  
Supriya Basu ◽  
Kadambari Ghosh
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Shock Wave ◽  
Scoring System ◽  
Shock Wave Lithotripsy ◽  
Renal Stones ◽  
Extracorporeal Shock Wave ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Stone Density ◽  
Free Status

Introduction: Quadruple-D, based on Computed Tomography (CT) derived metrics, is a scoring system that helps urologists to predict the Stone Free Rate (SFR) following Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) in renal stones. Aim: To evaluate the efficacy of Quadruple-D scoring system to assess the SFR in individuals with renal stones measuring 1-2 cm in diameter after giving ESWL. Materials and Methods: The study was conducted on 120 patients. Systemic random sampling technique was applied with a sampling interval of two. Quadruple-D scoring, comprising of four Computed Tomography (CT) based metrics that is stonedimension, stone density, Hounsfield units (HU), Skin-to-Stone Distance (SSD) and stone location, was done prior to ESWL. The scores ranged from zero (worst) to four (best) points. Plain abdominal radiography was done three weeks after ESWL to assess SFR. Complete clearance was considered the stone free status. Patients were divided into group A with complete stone clearance and group B with residual stone. All the statistical analysis was done using IBM SPSS 26.0. Student’s t-test or Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare continuous variables. Fisher’s-exact test and Chi-square test were used to analyse the cross charts between two categories. Results:The mean ellipsoid Stone Volume (SV) was 396.44±163.23 mm3 and 395.81±227.52 mm3 in group A and B, respectively. The stone density was 724.28±210.90 in group A and 814.56±190.63 in group B. In group A, 9.20% and in group B, 34.09% of the patients had stones in lower calyx. The difference between the groups based on the above parameters were statistically significant. The Quadruple-D score was 2.09±0.65 and 1.54±0.79 in group A and B, respectively. The Area Under the Curve (AUC) of Quadruple-D scoring system was 0.674. The age, sex, BMI, laterality of the stone and SSD did not predict stone-free status in this study. Conclusion: Quadruple-D scoring system has been successfully validated as the SFR showed a parallel increase with every positive component. Quadruple-D is an easy to use clinical tool to predict the success rate of ESWL.

scholarly journals EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCK WAVE LITHOTRIPSY;

2012 ◽  
Vol 19 (05) ◽  
pp. 636-641
Author(s):  
ZAKIR HUSSAIN RAJPAR ◽  
JAI PAL PARYANI ◽  
SHAFIQUE-UR- REHMAN MEMON ◽  
Aziz Abdullah ◽  
Ubedullah Shaikh
Keyword(s):  
Shock Wave ◽  
Medical Therapy ◽  
Shock Wave Lithotripsy ◽  
Conventional Treatment ◽  
Renal Stones ◽  
Female Ratio ◽  
Extracorporeal Shock Wave ◽  
Quasi Experimental ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Objective: To determine the efficacy of Alpha blocker as adjunctive medical therapy , which increases the stone clearance afterextracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) to treat renal stones. Design: Quasi Experimental study. Setting: Department of Urology,Liaquat National Hospital, Karachi. Period: September 2010 to March 2011. Materials & Method: Ultrasound guided Dornier Alpha Impactlithotripter was used for shock wave lithotripsy. Study was carried out on 60 patients who underwent single session of ESWL for renal calculus.Patients were divided in two groups, Group A (n=30) received conventional treatment and Group B (n=30) received Alpha-1 Blocker in additionto conventional treatment. All patients were evaluated with X-ray and Ultrasound (KUB) after 2 weeks and repeated at the end of month. Failureis defined as unsuccessful expulsion after 4 weeks and patient desire to remove the stone before day 30. Result: Out of 60 patients, 45(75%)were males and 15(257%) were females with male to female ratio was 3:1. The average age of the patients was found 36.32 ± 14.8 (Rangingfrom 15 to 75) years. Complete clearance was achieved in 76.7% of those receiving Alpha-1 Blocker and in 46.7% of controls at 1 month (P =0.001). This difference was statistically significant. Conclusions: The results of my study demonstrate that Alpha-1 Blocker therapy, as anadjunctive medical therapy after ESWL is more effective than lithotripsy alone for the treatment of patients with large renal stones and is equallysafe.

scholarly journals COMPARISON OF THE SUCCESS OF EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCK WAVE LITHOTRIPSY (ESWL) WITH AND WITHOUT DJ STENTING IN PROXIMAL URETERIC STONE

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 21-24
Author(s):  
Dr. Mudassar Saeed Pansota
Keyword(s):  
Shock Wave ◽  
Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy ◽  
Shock Wave Lithotripsy ◽  
P Value ◽  
Ureteric Stone ◽  
Extracorporeal Shock Wave ◽  
Dj Stent ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Average Size

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: There is disagreement in the use of ureteral double-J stent before the extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), although most of the urologists suggest using stent in shock wave lithotripsy technique for stones bigger than 20mm, for preventing the risk of developing steinstrasse. To compare the success of ESWL with and without DJ stenting in proximal ureteric stone. METHODOLOGY: A total of 60 patients form both genders, between 15 to 55 years of age, with a single proximal ureteric stone, were included. Patients with solitary functioning kidney, multiple stones, pregnancy, pyonephrosis and sepsis were excluded. In Group-A, ESWL without DJ stenting was completed while in Group-B, ESWL with DJ stent placement was done. In all patients, at least 4 sessions were done fortnightly. Patients were followed regularly and final success was noted after one month of completion of ESWL sessions. RESULTS: The mean age was 36.85 ± 8.61 years. From 60 patients, 29 (48.33%) were men and 231 (51.67%) were women.Mean body mass index (BMI) was 28.30±2.20 kg/m . The average size of the stone was 12.47 ± 2.57 mm. Success (according to stone removal) of Group-A (ESWL without DJS) was seen in 26 (86.67%) patients while in Group-B (ESWL with DJS) was seen in 16 (53.33%) patients with P-value of 0.005. CONCLUSION: This study concluded that success (in terms of stone clearance) of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) without DJ stenting is higher compared to with DJ stenting in upper ureteric stone.

scholarly journals Comparison of Slow Rate versus Fast Rate Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in Patients with Urolithiasis

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 1921-1923
Author(s):  
Muhammad Musa Kakar ◽  
Asadullah . ◽  
Masha Khan ◽  
Ijaz Ur Rehman
Keyword(s):  
Shock Wave ◽  
Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy ◽  
Slow Rate ◽  
Shock Wave Lithotripsy ◽  
Fast Rate ◽  
Female Patients ◽  
Extracorporeal Shock Wave ◽  
Group A ◽  
Male Patients ◽  
Group B

Objectives: To compare the success of slow rate with fast rate extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in patients undergoing treatment of urolithiasis. Study design: Randomized controlled trial Place & Duration of Study: This study was conducted in Urology Department of Sandeman Civil Hospital, Quetta for one year duration from 1stApril 2020 to 30thMarch 2021. Methods: Total ninety patients who were divided in two equal groups i.e. Group A in which patients received treatment with slow rate extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and group B in which patients received treatment with fast rate extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Results: There were 32 (71.1%) male patients and 13 (28.9%) female patients in group A. In group B, there were 28 (62.2%) male patients and 17 (37.8%) female patients. Mean age in group A was 35.61+4.19 years while in group B, the mean age was 34.11+69.32 years. The success rate of slow rate extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy was 36 (80%) and that of fast rate extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy was 21 (46.7%) (p-<0.05). Conclusions: The slow rate extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy is better than fast rate extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for elimination of urolithiasis. Keywords: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, Slow rate ESWL, Fast rate ESWL

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document