Volume : 08, Issue : 02, February – 2021

44.OUTCOMES OF PNEUMATIC LITHOTRIPSY VERSUS HOLMIUM LASER IN DISTAL URETERIC STONES

RIAZ HUSSAIN LAGHARI, HARRIS H. QURESHI, PARDEEP KUMAR, NAVEED MAHAR, SUNIL KUMAR, USAMA-BIN-SHAHEEN, GOHAR SULTAN, ALTAF HASHMI, MANZOOR HUSSAIN

Abstract :

Objective: To compare the outcomes of pneumatic lithotripsy versus holmium laser in distal ureteric stones
Study Design: Cross sectional study
Setting & Duration of Study: The study was conducted at department of Urology in Sindh Institute of Urology and Transplantation (SIUT) Karachi. Six months. Since 1st July 2020 till 31st December 2020.
Method: 208 patients who underwent Pneumatic Lithotripsy and Holmium Laser in Distal ureteric stones were selected for the study, who were randomized into 2 groups of 104, in each group the success rate in the pneumatic group and in laser group is calculated. Outcomes were assessed in terms of intra-operative time period, stone migration, need for stent placement, hospital stay and stone clearance.
Results: There were total 208 cases of mean age of 37.15±9.14 years. When they were evaluated for stone size mean size of stone was 8.9±2.24mm of which the mean stone size of pneumatic lithotripsy was 8.50±2.21 and in the Ho: YAG laser group was 9.13±2.22. On comparison, it was noted that pneumatic lithotripsy was effective in 65 (62.5%) and Ho: YAG laser in 89 (85.57%) with a statistically significant difference (p< 0.06). On stratification, it was noted that there is no significant impact of age on the efficacy of the treatment. Ho: YAG laser was effective in 71 (79.77%) in age group <30 and showed the results of Ho: YAG laser 18 (20.22%) in >40 year of age. But there was significant difference for the size of stone in the treatment groups with a p-value of <0.05 as significant.
Conclusion: Outcomes are better in patients of ureteric stones having laser lithotripsy as compared to the patients having pneumatic lithotripsy.
Keywords: Pneumatic lithotripsy, Laser lithotripsy, ureteric stone

Cite This Article:

Please cite this article in press Riaz Hussain Laghari et al, Outcomes Of Pneumatic Lithotripsy Versus Holmium Laser In Distal Ureteric Stones., Indo Am. J. P. Sci, 2021; 08(02).

Number of Downloads : 10

References :

References :

1. Iqbal N, Assad S, Rahat Aleman Bhatti J, Hasan A, Shabbir MU, Akhter S.Comparison of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Urolithiasis Between Children and Adults: A Single Centre Study. Cureus. 2016;8:e810.
2. Kumar A, Vasudeva P, Nanda B, Kumar N, Jha SK, Singh H. A Prospective Randomized Comparison Between Laparoscopic Ureterolithotomy and Semirigid Ureteroscopy for Upper Ureteral Stones>2.cm: A Single-Center Experience? J Endourol. 2015; 29: 47–51
3. Ercil H, Alma E, Bas O, Unal U, Sener NC, Vuruskan E, Senturk AB, Gurbaz ZG, safety and efficacy of pneumatic lithotripters versus homium laseroin multiple ureteral calculi. Arch Iran Med. 2016; 19(11): 786 – 790.
4. Li L, Pan Y, Weng Z, Bao W, Yu Z, Wang F. A Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Pneumatic Litho tripsy and Holmium Laser for Management of Middle and Distal Ureteral Calculi. J Endourol. 2015; 29: 883 – 887.
5. Perez Castro E, Osther PJ, Jinga V, Razvi H, Stravodimos KG, Parikh K, et al. CROES Ureteroscopy Global Study Group. Differences in ureteroscopic stone treatment and outcomes for distal, mid–proximal, or multiple ureteral locations: the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society ureteroscopy global study. Eur Urol. 2014; 66: 102 – 109.
6. Degirmenci T, Gunlusoy B, Kozacioglu Z, Arslan M, Koras O, Arslan B, Minareci S. Comparison of Ho: YAG laser and pneumatic lithotripsy in the treatment of impacted ureteral stones: an analysis of risk factors. Kaohsiung J MedSci. 2014; 30: 153 – 158.
7. Denstedt JD, Razvi HA, Rowe E, Grignon DJ, Eberwein PM. Investigation of the tissue effects of a new device for intracorporeal lithotripsy: the Swiss Lithoclast. J. Urol. 1995; 153: 535– 7.
8. Denstedt JD, Eberwein PM, Singh RR. The Swiss Lithoclast: a new device for intracorporeal lithotripsy. J. Urol. 1992; 148: 1088– 1090.
9. Robert M, Bennani A, Guiter J, Averous M, Grasset D. Treatment of 150 ureteric calculi with the Lithoclast. Eur. Urol. 1994; 26: 212– 15.
10. Vorreuther R, Klotz T, Heidenreich A, Nayal W, Engelmann U.Pneumatic  v  electrokinetic  lithotripsy in treatment of ureteral stones. J.Endourol. 1998; 12: 233– 6.
11. Sayer J, Johnson DE, Price RE, Cromeens DM. Ureteral lithotripsy with the Holmium:YAG laser. J. Clin. Laser Med. Surg. 1993; 11: 61– 5.
12. Grasso M. Experience with the holmium laser as an endoscopic lithotrite. Urology 1996; 48:199– 206.
13. Teichman JM, Rogenes VJ, McIver BD, Harris JM. Holmium:YAG cystolithotripsy of large bladder calculi. Urology 1997; 50: 44– 8.
14. Vassar GJ, Chan KF, Teichman JM et al. Holmium:YAG lithotripsy: photothermal mechanism. J. Endourol. 1999; 13: 181– 90.
15. Salman Ahmed Tipu, Hammad Afzal Malik, Nazim Mohhayuddin, Gauhar Sultan, Manzoor Hussain. Treatment of Ureteric Calculi – Use of Holmium: YAG Laser Lithotripsy versus Pneumatic Lithoclast. (JPMA 57:440:2007)
16. Chen S. · Zhou L. Wei T, Luo D…. – Comparison of Holmium: YAG Laser and Pneumatic Lithotripsy in the Treatment of Ureteral Stones – Urologia Internationalis – Urol Int 2017;98:125-133 – https://doi.org/10.1159/000448692
17. Amir Reza Abedi, M Reza Razzaghi, Farzad Allameh, Fereshte Aliakbari – Pneumatic Lithotripsy Versus Laser Lithotripsy for Ureteral Stones – J Lasers Med Sci. 2018 Autumn; 9(4): 233–236, Published online 2018 Sep 17. doi: 10.15171/jlms.2018.42
18. Hani H. Nour, Ahmed I. Kamel, Hazem Elmansy, Mohamad H. Badawy, Waleed Shabana, Ayman Abdelwahab, Ahmed Elbaz, Tarek Eleithy & Mamdouh Rushdy (2020) Pneumatic vs laser lithotripsy for mid-ureteric stones: Clinical and cost effectiveness results of a prospective trial in a developing country, Arab Journal of Urology, 18:3, 181-186, DOI: 10.1080/2090598X.2020.1749800
19. Hakan ErcilMD, Ergun AlmaMD1 , Okan BasMD2 ,Umut Unal MD1 Safety and Efficacy of Pneumatic Lithotripters Versus Holmium Laser on Multiple Ureteral Calculi. Arch Iran Med. 2016; 19(11): 786 – 790
20. Serdar Kalemci, Burak Turna, Adnan Şimşir, Oktay Nazlı – Ho:YAG laser versus pneumatic lithotripsy for management of pediatric ureteral stones: a prospective–comparative analysis with adults – VOLUME 16, ISSUE 1, P35.E1-35.E7, FEBRUARY 01, 2020 – https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2019.11.006
21. Alazaby, H., Mohey, A., Omar, R. et al. Impacted ≥ 10-mm pelvic ureteric stone treatment: laser lithotripsy alone or in combination with pneumatic lithotripsy—a prospective, comparative study. Afr J Urol 26, 16 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12301-020-00028-7
22. Demir, A., Karadağ, M.A., Çeçen, K. et al. Pneumatic versus laser ureteroscopic lithotripsy: a comparison of initial outcomes and cost. Int Urol Nephrol 46, 2087–2093 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-014-0787-x
23. Zakir Hussain Rajpar, Imran Memon, Kashifuddin Qayoom Soomro, Afhan Qayoom – Pneumatic vs laser lithotripsy for mid-ureteric stones: Clinical and cost effectiveness – Isra Med J. | Vol 11 – Issue 4 | Jul – Aug 2019
24. Mahmood, S. and Bajalan, D. (2016) Ureteroscopic Management of Ureteral Calculi: Pneumatic versus Holmium: YAG Laser Lithotripsy. Open Journal of Urology, 6, 36-42. doi: 10.4236/oju.2016.63008.