Aim: To determine efficacy and clinical predictors of stone fragmentation when using slow-rate shock wave lithotripsy (SWL). Patients and Methods: In total, 116 patients with radiopaque urinary tract stones were randomized into two groups: 57 patients were treated with SWL at 90 shocks/min, and 59 patients were treated with SWL at 120 shocks/min. The efficacy of SWL was evaluated within 1 month after treatment. Patient characteristics, features of stones, and SWL conditions were reviewed. Success rates relating to individual parameters were assessed by using chi-square and Student t tests. All factors were further entered into multivariate logistic regression analysis. Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups with regard to age, sex, site and size of the stones, renal function, and total number of shock waves. In univariate analysis, the success rate was significantly related to shock wave frequency (p = 0.023), length and width of the stones (p < 0.001), total number of shock waves (p = 0.047), and age (p = 0.049). In multivariate analysis, however, only shock wave rate and stone length remained statistically significant (p = 0.021 and p = 0.046, respectively). The overall success rate was significantly higher in the group treated with 90 shocks/min (p = 0.02). However, this higher success rate was statistically significant only in patients with a stone length ≧10 mm (50.0 vs. 18.5%, p = 0.019). Conclusion: SWL at 90 shocks/min yielded better outcomes than SWL at 120 shocks/min, particularly in patients with stone lengths ≧10 mm.

Keywords:
Calculi, fragmentation, Slow-rate shock wave lithotripsy, Treatment outcome, shock wave lithotripsy
This content is only available via PDF.
© 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel
2007
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.