Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy Versus Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Lower-Pole Nephrolithiasis
Vincent G. Bird, Michael Seth Borofsky
Abstract
Vincent G. Bird, Michael Seth Borofsky
Abstract
This chapter summarizes the results of the Lower Pole Study I study in which patients with symptomatic lower pole renal calculi were randomized to receive extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). The study found that patients receiving ESWL had lower stone-clearance rates and a more frequent need for retreatment but lower morbidity, whereas those receiving PCNL had higher stone-clearance rate and fewer retreatments but greater morbidity.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This chapter summarizes the results of the Lower Pole Study I study in which patients with symptomatic lower pole renal calculi were randomized to receive extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). The study found that patients receiving ESWL had lower stone-clearance rates and a more frequent need for retreatment but lower morbidity, whereas those receiving PCNL had higher stone-clearance rate and fewer retreatments but greater morbidity.
Key concepts: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy, Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, Medicine, Lithotripsy, Renal stone, Surgery, Extracorporeal, Percutaneous