Skip to content
akaturk Academic measurement

Article detail · 2020 · article

Comparison of semirigid ureteroscopy, flexible ureteroscopy, and shock wave lithotripsy for initial treatment of 11-20 mm proximal ureteral stones

YÖKSİS OpenAlex Open access · gold SJR Q3
Year2020
Citations18OpenAlex
Percentile%84.7
FWCI1.441.00 = world average
Scopus (SJR)Q3

Data source split

  • YÖKSİSYÖKSİS article record
  • YÖKSİS venueArchivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia
  • Catalog match (ISSN)Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia
  • OpenAlexOpenAlex enrichment (abstract, citations, topics)

Abstract

OpenAlex English

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to retrospectively evaluate the effectiveness and safety of flexible ureteroscopy (f-URS), semirigid ureteroscopy (sr-URS), and shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) to treat single 11-20 mm stones in the proximal ureter. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients treated at our clinic for 11-20 mm single stones in the proximal ureter who underwent f-URS, sr-URS or SWL as initial lithotripsy methods were compared in terms of their clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes. RESULTS: A comparison among 201 patients who had undergone f-URS, 119 patients who had undergone sr-URS, and 162 patients who had undergone SWL showed no significant baseline differences in patients' demographic and stone characteristics. Stone-free rates on the 15th day and 3rd month were higher with f-URS (89.6% and 97%, respectively) than with sr-URS (67.2% and 94.1%, respectively) and SWL (41.4% and 79.0%, respectively; all p < 0.001). Retreatment rates were significantly higher with SWL than with the other two modalities (p < 0.001); auxiliary procedure rates were significantly lower with f-URS than with the other two modalities (p < 0.001). Treatment-related complication rate at the end of the 3rd month was lower with f-URS than with SWL (p = 0.022). Furthermore, f-URS was more effective than sr-URS for treating impacted stones. CONCLUSIONS: We found that f-URS was highly successful as an initial lithotripsy procedure for medium-sized proximal ureteral stones, and it helped achieve early stone-free outcomes with a lower need for retreatment and auxiliary procedures, lower complication rates, and higher effectiveness on the impacted stones compared with sr-URS and SWL.

Topics

Citations

OpenAlex cited_by_count. Not a WoS or Scopus citation count; those sources have no separate column here.

18citationsOpenAlex · cited_by_count (cache / database)

10 publications in the local catalog that cite this work (OpenAlex reference match; not the full global list).

  1. 2021 Effect of Endoscopic Ureteral Stone Treatment on Kidney FunctionCitations 4 · OpenAlex
  2. 2021 Effect of Endoscopic Ureteral Stone Treatment on Kidney FunctionCitations 4 · OpenAlex
  3. 2021 Effect of Endoscopic Ureteral Stone Treatment on Kidney FunctionCitations 4 · OpenAlex
  4. 2026 Predictive Factors for Unsuccessful Holmium: YAG Laser Lithotripsy in the Retrograde Treatment of Proximal Ureteral StonesCitations 0 · OpenAlex
  5. 2026 Predictive Factors for Unsuccessful Holmium: YAG Laser Lithotripsy in the Retrograde Treatment of Proximal Ureteral StonesCitations 0 · OpenAlex
  6. 2023 Supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy in impacted proximal ureteral stones larger than 15 millimeters; Comparison of flexible ureterorenoscopy and retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomyCitations 0 · OpenAlex
  7. 2021 Where Is It Logical to Break-Up A Ureter Stone with Endoscopic Surgery?Citations 0 · OpenAlex
  8. 2021 Where is it logical to break-up a ureter stone with endoscopic surgery?Citations 0 · OpenAlex
  9. 2021 Where is it logical to break-up a ureter stone with endoscopic surgery?Citations 0 · OpenAlex
  10. 2021 Where is it logical to break-up a ureter stone with endoscopic surgery?Citations 0 · OpenAlex

Authors

7
  1. İBRAHİM GÜVEN KARTAL 1
  2. BURHAN BAYLAN 2
  3. Mehmet Çağlar Çakıcı 3
  4. SERCAN SARI 4
  5. VOLKAN SELMİ YOZGAT BOZOK ÜNİVERSİTESİ 5
  6. Harun Özdemir 6
  7. FATİH YALÇINKAYA 7