SIU-WJU Article of the Month – April 2018
The supine versus prone approach to shockwave lithotripsy for distal ureteric stones—time to settle this argument?
SIU Academy®. Persaud S. 04/01/18; 214433
Topic: Surgical Management of Upper Urinary Tract CalculiThe supine versus prone approach to shockwave lithotripsy for distal ureteric stones—time to settle this argument?
Abstract
Discussion Forum (2)
Rate & Comment (0)
Purpose
We compared the outcomes of SWL to treat distal ureter stones with regard to the conventional prone and supine positions using the transgluteal approach through the greater sciatic foramen.
Methods
A prospective, randomized, single-blind, and multicenter study was conducted between October 2014 and July 2015. The inclusion criteria were radio-opaque distal ureter stones with a maximum diameter of 0.5−2 cm as measured on a CT scan. The included 160 patients were randomly assigned to two groups: the prone group (n = 80; treated in the con-ventional prone position) and the transgluteal group (n = 80; treated in the supine position using a transgluteal approach). In the latter group, the focused shock wave was transmitted through the greater sciatic foramen with the head positioned at a 40° angle to the vertical. “Stone-free” was defined as the complete clearance of stone fragments, assessed using a CT scan at 2 weeks after treatment. Overall satisfaction was self-reported using a 0–5 Likert scale.
Results
The overall efficacy was 66.9%. The stone-free rate was significantly higher in the transgluteal group (72.6%) than in the prone group (54.7%; odds ratio 2.413, 95% CI 1.010−5.761, P = 0.023). No serious adverse events due to treatment were observed in either group. The satisfaction score of the transgluteal group was 4.21 ± 0.81, and 83.6% were willing to repeat the same procedure if necessary.
Conclusions
SWL using the transgluteal approach via a supine position through the greater sciatic foramen was more effective than via the conventional prone position. Furthermore, this approach provided a comparably safe and satisfactory procedure.
Keywords
Lithotripsy | Patient positioning | Prone position | Supine position | Ureteral calculi | Treatment outcome.
We compared the outcomes of SWL to treat distal ureter stones with regard to the conventional prone and supine positions using the transgluteal approach through the greater sciatic foramen.
Methods
A prospective, randomized, single-blind, and multicenter study was conducted between October 2014 and July 2015. The inclusion criteria were radio-opaque distal ureter stones with a maximum diameter of 0.5−2 cm as measured on a CT scan. The included 160 patients were randomly assigned to two groups: the prone group (n = 80; treated in the con-ventional prone position) and the transgluteal group (n = 80; treated in the supine position using a transgluteal approach). In the latter group, the focused shock wave was transmitted through the greater sciatic foramen with the head positioned at a 40° angle to the vertical. “Stone-free” was defined as the complete clearance of stone fragments, assessed using a CT scan at 2 weeks after treatment. Overall satisfaction was self-reported using a 0–5 Likert scale.
Results
The overall efficacy was 66.9%. The stone-free rate was significantly higher in the transgluteal group (72.6%) than in the prone group (54.7%; odds ratio 2.413, 95% CI 1.010−5.761, P = 0.023). No serious adverse events due to treatment were observed in either group. The satisfaction score of the transgluteal group was 4.21 ± 0.81, and 83.6% were willing to repeat the same procedure if necessary.
Conclusions
SWL using the transgluteal approach via a supine position through the greater sciatic foramen was more effective than via the conventional prone position. Furthermore, this approach provided a comparably safe and satisfactory procedure.
Keywords
Lithotripsy | Patient positioning | Prone position | Supine position | Ureteral calculi | Treatment outcome.
Purpose
We compared the outcomes of SWL to treat distal ureter stones with regard to the conventional prone and supine positions using the transgluteal approach through the greater sciatic foramen.
Methods
A prospective, randomized, single-blind, and multicenter study was conducted between October 2014 and July 2015. The inclusion criteria were radio-opaque distal ureter stones with a maximum diameter of 0.5−2 cm as measured on a CT scan. The included 160 patients were randomly assigned to two groups: the prone group (n = 80; treated in the con-ventional prone position) and the transgluteal group (n = 80; treated in the supine position using a transgluteal approach). In the latter group, the focused shock wave was transmitted through the greater sciatic foramen with the head positioned at a 40° angle to the vertical. “Stone-free” was defined as the complete clearance of stone fragments, assessed using a CT scan at 2 weeks after treatment. Overall satisfaction was self-reported using a 0–5 Likert scale.
Results
The overall efficacy was 66.9%. The stone-free rate was significantly higher in the transgluteal group (72.6%) than in the prone group (54.7%; odds ratio 2.413, 95% CI 1.010−5.761, P = 0.023). No serious adverse events due to treatment were observed in either group. The satisfaction score of the transgluteal group was 4.21 ± 0.81, and 83.6% were willing to repeat the same procedure if necessary.
Conclusions
SWL using the transgluteal approach via a supine position through the greater sciatic foramen was more effective than via the conventional prone position. Furthermore, this approach provided a comparably safe and satisfactory procedure.
Keywords
Lithotripsy | Patient positioning | Prone position | Supine position | Ureteral calculi | Treatment outcome.
We compared the outcomes of SWL to treat distal ureter stones with regard to the conventional prone and supine positions using the transgluteal approach through the greater sciatic foramen.
Methods
A prospective, randomized, single-blind, and multicenter study was conducted between October 2014 and July 2015. The inclusion criteria were radio-opaque distal ureter stones with a maximum diameter of 0.5−2 cm as measured on a CT scan. The included 160 patients were randomly assigned to two groups: the prone group (n = 80; treated in the con-ventional prone position) and the transgluteal group (n = 80; treated in the supine position using a transgluteal approach). In the latter group, the focused shock wave was transmitted through the greater sciatic foramen with the head positioned at a 40° angle to the vertical. “Stone-free” was defined as the complete clearance of stone fragments, assessed using a CT scan at 2 weeks after treatment. Overall satisfaction was self-reported using a 0–5 Likert scale.
Results
The overall efficacy was 66.9%. The stone-free rate was significantly higher in the transgluteal group (72.6%) than in the prone group (54.7%; odds ratio 2.413, 95% CI 1.010−5.761, P = 0.023). No serious adverse events due to treatment were observed in either group. The satisfaction score of the transgluteal group was 4.21 ± 0.81, and 83.6% were willing to repeat the same procedure if necessary.
Conclusions
SWL using the transgluteal approach via a supine position through the greater sciatic foramen was more effective than via the conventional prone position. Furthermore, this approach provided a comparably safe and satisfactory procedure.
Keywords
Lithotripsy | Patient positioning | Prone position | Supine position | Ureteral calculi | Treatment outcome.
Code of conduct/disclaimer available in General Terms & Conditions
{{ help_message }}
{{filter}}