Lumbar Ureteral Lithiasy: Therapeutical Options

Abstract

Patients with lumbar ureteral stones larger than 5 mm should be addressed towards ESWL. It is an effective nonintrusive modality with limited adverse effects.

In our study we matched treatment effectiveness and patients compliance in standard ESWL versus ureteroscopy with lithotripsy.

Material and Methods.

Since January 2001 to March 2003 72 patients with middle ureteral calculi underwent ESWL treatment, and 48 patients with the same stone location were submitted to ureteroscopy with lithotripsy. It was the first choice modality in strongly symptomatic patients. A 1–5 score system was employed to assess the compliance degree. Patients with the highest compliance were referred as 1 and patients with the lowest one were regarded as 5.

Results.

A 96% stone free rate (46/48) was achieved in the ureteroscopy arm. The stone was pushed back in the lower calyx of the kidney only in 2 (4%) patients. 37 (52%) out of 72 patients in ESWL arm were stone free at the 1st ESWL treatment. 14 (19%) patients were stone free at the 2nd one, and 8 patients (12%) were stone free at the 3rd one. 13 patients (18%) were never stone free and underwent ureteroscopy. The means of compliance degree were 1.6 in the ureteroscopy with lithoripsy, and 3.8 in the ESWL treatment.

Conclusions.

Ureteroscopy with lithotripsy may effectively replace ESWL in the lumbar ureteral lithiasy treatment, because of high stone free rate and low morbility. Expenditure is almost the same in both modalities.