Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy as a primary modality for large proximal ureteral calculi: Comparison to rigid ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy

Young Hwii Ko, Sung Gu Kang, Jae Young Park, Jae Hyun Bae, Seok Ho Kang, Dae Yeon Cho, Hong Seok Park, Jun Cheon, Jeong Gu Lee, Je Jong Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To define the role of laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (LU) as a primary modality for large proximal ureteral stones, we compared the outcomes of primary LU with those of ureterorenoscopy (URS), the currently established modality in this circumstance. Materials and Methods: Among 71 patients who underwent LU in our institution between February 2005 and January 2010, 32 patients with stone size over 1.5 cm who underwent LU as a primary modality without prior shockwave lithotripsy or URS and for whom LU was conducted as a separate procedure were exclusively enrolled. Based on preoperative characteristics of patients and stones, this patient group was matched with the URS group (n = 32, rigid pneumatic lithotripter) during the same period. Results: The LU group and the URS group were similar in age, gender distribution, body mass index, stone size (18.1 ± 4.2 versus 17.9 ± 3.6 mm; P = .88), and stone location. Members of the LU group required a longer operative time (118 ± 53 versus 59 ± 41 minutes; P < .001) and hospital stay (5.9 ± 2.1 versus 3.4 ± 2.4 days; P < .001) and had greater blood loss (155 ± 62 mL). However, stone clearance rate (no remnant stone in postoperative X-ray of the kidney, ureter, and bladder) in a single session was marginally higher in the LU group (93.8% versus 68.8%; P = .06). Total complication rate was not significant and was slightly higher in the URS group (12.5% versus 21.9%, P = .51). Stone migration into the kidney (n = 2 versus 5), ureteral perforation (n = 0 versus 3), open conversion (n = 1 versus 2), and ureteral stricture (n = 1 versus 2), as long-term complications, occurred more frequently in the URS group. Conclusions: For large proximal ureteral stones, LU can be conducted safely as a first-line procedure without increase of complication rate, compared with conventional URS. Although LU required a prolonged operative time and a longer hospital stay and blood loss was greater, our data showed an advantage of LU in high clearance rate in a single procedure.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)7-13
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques
Volume21
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011 Jan 1

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy as a primary modality for large proximal ureteral calculi: Comparison to rigid ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this