EFFICACY OF HOLMIUM LASER (LL) WITH PNEUMATIC LITHOTRIPSY (PL) IN PATIENTS WITH PROXIMAL URETERAL STONES

WA MEMON; Z MALIK; R KUMAR; SF AHMED; MI SHAIKH; AR KHOWAJA

doi:10.54112/bcsrj.v2024i1.776

Authors

WA MEMON Department of Urology, Liaquat National Hospital and Medical College Karachi, Sindh, Pakistan
Z MALIK Department of Urology, Liaquat National Hospital and Medical College Karachi, Sindh, Pakistan
R KUMAR Department of Urology, Liaquat National Hospital and Medical College Karachi, Sindh, Pakistan
SF AHMED Department of Urology, Liaquat National Hospital and Medical College Karachi, Sindh, Pakistan
MI SHAIKH Department of Urology, Khairpur Medical College and Teaching Institute, Sindh, Pakistan
AR KHOWAJA Department of Urology, Liaquat National Hospital and Medical College Karachi, Sindh, Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54112/bcsrj.v2024i1.776

Keywords:

Success Rate, Holmium Laser, Pneumatic Lithotripsy, Proximal Ureteral Stones

Abstract

The present study aimed to compare the success rate of holmium laser (LL) with pneumatic lithotripsy (PL) in patients with proximal ureteral stones. A randomized controlled trial was carried out in the Department of Urology at the Liaquat National Hospital in Karachi between December 2020 and June 2021. Included were 124 patients who had ureteric stones in their proximal ureters. Pneumatic lithotripsy and holmium laser groups were created for the patients. The complete removal of the stones, as determined by kidney, ureter, and bladder computed tomography (CT-KUB), was the definition of the treatment's success. Stratification was carried out, and descriptive statistics were calculated. The post-stratification Chi-square test was used, and a P-value of less than 0.05 was deemed significant. The average length of time a stone was present was 10.54 ± 2.65 days in group A and 10.43 ± 2.68 days in group B. The average stone size in group A was 1.58 ± 0.22 cm, whereas in group B, it was 1.54 ± 0.22 cm. 93.5% of group A and 69.4% of group B were stone-free. The study groups showed a noteworthy correlation about their stone-free condition. For proximal ureteral stones with a size up to 2 cm, comparing pneumatic lithotripsy 1.9 to holmium laser, which has a higher success rate, is the recommended method.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Atar, M., Bodakci, M. N., Sancaktutar, A. A., Penbegul, N., Soylemez, H., Bozkurt, Y., Hatipoglu, N. K., and Cakmakci, S. (2013). Comparison of pneumatic and laser lithotripsy in the treatment of pediatric ureteral stones. Journal of pediatric urology 9, 308-312.

Ather, M. H., Nazim, S. M., and Sulaiman, M. N. (2009). Efficacy of semirigid ureteroscopy with pneumatic lithotripsy for ureteral stone surface area of greater than 30 mm2. Journal of Endourology 23, 619-622.

Bapat, S. S., Pai, K. V., Purnapatre, S. S., Yadav, P. B., and Padye, A. S. (2007). Comparison of holmium laser and pneumatic lithotripsy in managing upper-ureteral stones. Journal of endourology 21, 1425-1428.

Binbay, M., Tepeler, A., Singh, A., Akman, T., Tekinaslan, E., Sarilar, O., Baykal, M., and Muslumanoglu, A. Y. (2011). Evaluation of pneumatic versus holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy for impacted ureteral stones. International urology and nephrology 43, 989-995.

Degirmenci, T., Gunlusoy, B., Kozacioglu, Z., Arslan, M., Koras, O., Arslan, B., and Minareci, S. (2014). Comparison of Ho: YAG laser and pneumatic lithotripsy in the treatment of impacted ureteral stones: an analysis of risk factors. The Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences 30, 153-158.

Gunlusoy, B., Degirmenci, T., Arslan, M., Kozacioglu, Z., Nergiz, N., Minareci, S., and Ayder, A. R. (2008). Ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy: is the location of the stone important in decision making? Analysis of 1296 patients. Journal of endourology 22, 291-294.

Jeon, S. S., HYUN, J. H., and LEE, K. S. (2005). A comparison of holmium: YAG laser with Lithoclast lithotripsy in ureteral calculi fragmentation. International journal of urology 12, 544-547.

Kassem, A., ElFayoumy, H., ElSaied, W., ElGammal, M., and Bedair, A. (2012). Laser and pneumatic lithotripsy in the endoscopic management of large ureteric stones: a comparative study. Urologia Internationalis 88, 311-315.

Khalil, M. (2013). Management of impacted proximal ureteral stone: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy with holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy. Urology annals 5, 88-92.

Khan, A. A., Hussain, S. A., Khan, N.-U., Kamran Majeed, S., and Sulaiman, M. (2011). Safety and efficacy of ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 21, 616-9.

Knispel, H., Klän, R., Heicappell, R., and Miller, K. (1998). Pneumatic lithotripsy applied through deflected working channel of miniureteroscope: results in 143 patients. Journal of endourology 12, 513-515.

Manohar, T., Ganpule, A., and Desai, M. (2008). Comparative evaluation of Swiss LithoClast 2® and Holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy for impacted upper-ureteral stones. Journal of endourology 22, 443-446.

Razaghi, M. R., and Razi, A. (2001). Comparison between the Holmium Laser (Made in Iran) and Pneumatic Lithotripsy in Patients Suffering from Upper Ureteral Stone between 1-2cm.

Razzaghi, M. R., Razi, A., Mazloomfard, M. M., Taklimi, A. G., Valipour, R., and Razzaghi, Z. (2013). Safety and efficacy of pneumatic lithotripters versus holmium laser in management of ureteral calculi: a randomized clinical trial. Urology journal 10, 762-766.

Salvadó, J. A., Mandujano, R., Saez, I., Saavedra, A., Dell'oro, A., Dominguez, J., and Trucco, C. (2012). Ureteroscopic lithotripsy for distal ureteral calculi: comparative evaluation of three different lithotriptors. Journal of endourology 26, 343-346.

Sun, Y., Wang, L., Liao, G., Xu, C., Gao, X., Yang, Q., and Qian, S. (2001). Pneumatic lithotripsy versus laser lithotripsy in the endoscopic treatment of ureteral calculi. Journal of endourology 15, 587-590.

Tipu, S. A., Malik, H. A., Mohhayuddin, N., Sultan, G., Hussain, M., Hashmi, A., Naqvi, S., and Rizvi, S. (2007). Treatment of ureteric calculi-use of Holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy versus pneumatic lithoclast. JPMA 57, 440-3.

Türk, C., Petřík, A., Sarica, K., Seitz, C., Skolarikos, A., Straub, M., and Knoll, T. (2016). EAU guidelines on interventional treatment for urolithiasis. European urology 69, 475-482.

Wu, C.-F., Chen, C.-S., Lin, W.-Y., Shee, J.-J., Lin, C.-L., Chen, Y., and Huang, W.-S. (2005). Therapeutic options for proximal ureter stone: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus semirigid ureterorenoscope with holmium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser lithotripsy. Urology 65, 1075-1079.

Yin, X., Tang, Z., Yu, B., Wang, Y., Li, Y., Yang, Q., and Tang, W. (2013). Holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy versus pneumatic lithotripsy for treatment of distal ureteral calculi: a meta-analysis. Journal of endourology 27, 408-414.

Yiu, M., Liu, P., Yiu, T., and Chan, A. (1996). Clinical experience with holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy of ureteral calculi. Lasers in Surgery and Medicine: The Official Journal of the American Society for Laser Medicine and Surgery 19, 103-106.

Zhu, H., Ye, X., Xiao, X., Chen, X., Zhang, Q., and Wang, H. (2014). Retrograde, antegrade, and laparoscopic approaches to the management of large upper ureteral stones after shockwave lithotripsy failure: a four-year retrospective study. Journal of endourology 28, 100-103.

Zhu, Z., Xi, Q., Wang, S., Liu, J., Ye, Z., Yu, X., Bai, J., and Li, C. (2010). Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for proximal ureteral calculi with severe hydronephrosis: assessment of different lithotriptors. Journal of endourology 24, 201-205.