Ureteroscopy vs Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Lower Pole Renal Stones: Treatment Variation and Outcomes in a Surgical Collaborative

Résumé fourni par la source

PURPOSE: AUA guidelines recommend ureteroscopy (URS) or shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) for lower pole (LP) stones ≤ 1 cm, while SWL is second line for stones > 1 to 2 cm. In the era of increasing URS, there are limited data on the modality used and outcomes. We assessed treatment distribution, stone-free rates (SFRs), and unplanned health care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative registry, we identified URS and SWL cases for LP stones ≤ 2 cm (2016-2021). We assessed the frequency of patients receiving URS or SWL as a proportion of their LP treatment. A logistic model determined predictive probability of treatment modality. Differences in complete SFRs, postoperative emergency department visits, and hospitalizations were assessed by size (≤1 cm, >1-2 cm), adjusted for patient factors and correlation within practice/provider. RESULTS: < .001). There were no significant differences in SFRs for > 1 to 2 cm stones. Emergency department visits were higher after URS for stones ≤ 1 cm (odds ratio [OR]: 2.95, 95% CI: 1.7-5.0) but not for > 1 to 2 cm stones (OR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.4-2.2). URS for stones ≤ 1 cm was associated with increased hospitalizations (OR: 4.67, 95% CI: 1.7-12.9) but not for stones > 1 to 2 cm (OR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.4-2.2). CONCLUSIONS: In Michigan, SWL is the chosen modality for LP stones ≤ 2 cm. For smaller stones, URS was more effective but had greater morbidity. For larger stones, both modalities demonstrated suboptimal efficacy. Our work demonstrates the need for interventions to improve outcomes.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.