Purpose: To present the results and complications of retrograde ureteroscopic lithotripsy for treatment of large ureteral stones. Methods: Nineteen patients were treated for ureteral stones ≥15 mm detected in CT or plain KUB film. Endoscopy was performed with either a semirigid or flexible ureteroscope. Stone fragmentation was performed using a 30 W Holmium laser. Results: The mean stone size was 20.7 mm (range 15–30). The mean duration of the operation was 82 min (45–140). Measures to prevent retropulsion of fragments into the kidney were not routinely applied. A subsequent RIRS during the same session was necessary in 2 cases. After a single procedure a stone free state was achieved in 15 cases (78.9%), while 4 others required a second session (ESWL or second ureterolithotripsy, 2 cases each). In only 1 patient, the stone-free state was not achieved after a 1.2 procedure per patient (overall success rate 94.7%). The mean duration of hospitalization was 1.9 days (range 1–5). Three patients experienced postoperative pyelonephritis and 2 others prolonged hematuria. Conclusion: Endoscopic lithotripsy is safe and effective in treating large ureteral stones. After a single endoscopic procedure, approximately 4 out of 5 patients are expected to become stone free. This rate increases to 95% with a second session of lithotripsy.

Keywords:
Large stones, Ureter, Ureteroscopy, Lithotripsy, Laser
1.
Grasso M, Conlin M, Bagley D. Retrograde ureteropyeloscopic treatment of 2 cm. or greater upper urinary tract and minor Staghorn calculi.
J Urol
. 1998 Aug;160(2):346–51.
2.
Basiri A, Simforoosh N, Ziaee A, Shayaninasab H, Moghaddam SM, Zare S. Retrograde, antegrade, and laparoscopic approaches for the management of large, proximal ureteral stones: a randomized clinical trial.
J Endourol
. 2008 Dec;22(12):2677–80.
4.
Aboutaleb H, Omar M, Salem S, Elshazly M. Management of upper ureteral stones exceeding 15 mm in diameter: Shock wave lithotripsy versus semirigid ureteroscopy with holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser lithotripsy. SAGE Open Med. 2016 Dec;4:2050312116685180.
5.
Mursi K, Elsheemy MS, Morsi HA, Ali Ghaleb AK, Abdel-Razzak OM. Semi-rigid ureteroscopy for ureteric and renal pelvic calculi: predictive factors for complications and success.
Arab J Urol
. 2013 Jun;11(2):136–41.
6.
Khoder WY, Bader M, Sroka R, Stief C, Waidelich R. Efficacy and safety of Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy for ureteroscopic removal of proximal and distal ureteral calculi.
BMC Urol
. 2014 Aug;14(1):62.
7.
Turkan S, Ekmekcioglu O, Irkilata L, Aydin M. Is semirigid ureteroscopy sufficient in the treatment of proximal ureteral stones? When is combined therapy with flexible ureteroscopy needed? Springerplus. 2016 Jan 13;5:30.
8.
Li H, Na W, Li H, Jiang Y, Gu X, Zhang M, et al. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus ureteroscopic lithotomy for large ([{GT}]15 mm) impacted upper ureteral stones in different locations: is the upper border of the fourth lumbar vertebra a good indication for choice of management -method?
J Endourol
. 2013 Sep;27(9):1120–5.
9.
Mugiya S, Ozono S, Nagata M, Takayama T, Nagae H. Retrograde endoscopic management of ureteral stones more than 2 cm in size.
Urology
. 2006 Jun;67(6):1164–8.
10.
Hollenbeck BK, Schuster TG, Faerber GJ, Wolf JS Jr. Comparison of outcomes of ureteroscopy for ureteral calculi located above and below the pelvic brim.
Urology
. 2001 Sep;58(3):351-6.
11.
Alameddine M, Azab MM, Nassir AA. Semi-rigid ureteroscopy: proximal versus distal ureteral stones.
Urol Ann
. 2016 Jan-Mar;8(1):84–6.
12.
Ziaee SA, Halimiasl P, Aminsharifi A, Shafi H, Beigi FM, Basiri A. Management of 10-15-mm proximal ureteral stones: ureteroscopy or extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy?
Urology
. 2008 Jan;71(1):28–31.
13.
Wu CF, Shee JJ, Lin WY, Lin CL, Chen CS. Comparison between extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and semirigid ureterorenoscope with holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy for treating large proximal ureteral stones.
J Urol
. 2004 Nov;172(5 Pt 1):1899–902.
14.
Tawfick ER. Treatment of large proximal ureteral stones: extra corporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus semi-rigid ureteroscope with lithoclast.
Int Arch Med
. 2010 Jan;3(1):3.
15.
Kallidonis P, Ntasiotis P, Knoll T, Sarica K, Papatsoris A, Somani BK, et al. Minimally Invasive Surgical Ureterolithotomy Versus Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy for Large Ureteric Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Literature.
Eur Urol Focus
. 2017 Dec;3(6):554–66.
16.
Sfoungaristos S, Mykoniatis I, Isid A, Gofrit ON, Rosenberg S, Hidas G, et al. Retrograde versus Antegrade Approach for the Management of Large Proximal Ureteral Stones.
BioMed Res Int
. 2016;2016:6521461.
© 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel
2019
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.