Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences) ›› 2023, Vol. 55 ›› Issue (3): 553-557. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2023.03.024

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Comparison of safety and effectiveness of active migration technique and in situ lithotripsy technique in the treatment of 1-2 cm upper ureteral calculi by flexible ure-teroscopy

Lei WANG,Tian-dong HAN,Wei-xing JIANG,Jun LI,Dao-xin ZHANG,Ye TIAN*()   

  1. Department of Urology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China
  • Received:2022-04-11 Online:2023-06-18 Published:2023-06-12
  • Contact: Ye TIAN E-mail:tianye166@126.com
  • Supported by:
    the Capital Health Research and Development of Special(2018-2-1101)

RICH HTML

  

Abstract:

Objective: To compare the safety and effectiveness of active migration technique and in situ lithotripsy technique in the treatment of 1-2 cm upper ureteral calculi by retrograde flexible ureteroscopy. Methods: A total of 90 patients with 1-2 cm upper ureteral calculi treated in the urology department of Beijing Friendship Hospital from August 2018 to August 2020 were selected as the subjects. The patients were divided into two groups using random number table: 45 patients in group A were treated with in situ lithotripsy and 45 patients in group B were treated with active migration technique. The active migration technique was to reposition the stones in the renal calyces convenient for lithotripsy with the help of body position change, water flow scouring, laser impact or basket displacement, and then conduct laser lithotripsy and stone extraction. The data of the patients before and after operation were collected and statistically analyzed. Results: The age of the patients in group A was (51.6±14.1) years, including 34 males and 11 females. The stone diameter was (1.48±0.24) cm, and the stone density was (897.8±175.9) Hu. The stones were located on the left in 26 cases and on the right in 19 cases. There were 8 cases with no hydronephrosis, 20 cases with grade Ⅰ hydronephrosis, 11 cases with grade Ⅱ hydronephrosis, and 6 cases with grade Ⅲ hydronephrosis. The age of the patients in group B was (51.8±13.7) years, including 30 males and 15 females. The stone diameter was (1.52±0.22) cm, and the stone density was (964.6±214.2) Hu. The stones were located on the left in 22 cases and on the right in 23 cases. There were 10 cases with no hydronephrosis, 23 cases with grade Ⅰ hydronephrosis, 8 cases with grade Ⅱ hydronephrosis, and 4 cases with grade Ⅲ hydronephrosis. There was no significant diffe-rence in general parameters and stone indexes between the two groups. The operation time of group A was (67.1±16.9) min and the lithotripsy time was (38.0±13.2) min. The operation time of group B was (72.2±14.8) min and the lithotripsy time was (40.6±12.6) min. There was no significant difference between the two groups. Four weeks after operation, the stone-free rate in group A was 86.7%, and in group B was 97.8%. There was no significant difference between the two groups. In terms of complications, 25 cases of hematuria, 16 cases of pain, 10 cases of bladder spasm and 4 cases of mild fever occurred in group A. There were 22 cases of hematuria, 13 cases of pain, 12 cases of bladder spasm and 2 cases of mild fever in group B. There was no significant difference between the two groups. Conclusion: Active migration technique is safe and effective in the treatment of 1-2 cm upper ureteral calculi.

Key words: Ureteral calculi, Flexible ureteroscopy, Lithotripsy, Active migration technique, Treatment outcome

CLC Number: 

  • R693.4

Table 1

Patients' demographics and stone criteria"

Variable Group A (n=45) Group B (n=45) P
Age/years, ${\bar x}$±s 51.6±14.1 51.8±13.7 0.975
Gender, n(%) 0.865
  Male 34 (75.6) 30 (66.7)
  Female 11 (24.4) 15 (33.3)
Stone criteria, ${\bar x}$±s
  Size/cm 1.48±0.24 1.52±0.22 0.489
  Density/Hu 897.8±175.9 964.6±214.2 0.092
Laterality, n(%) 0.714
  Left 26 (57.8) 22 (48.9)
  Right 19 (42.2) 23 (51.1)
Hydronephrosis, n(%) 0.290
  No 8 (17.8) 10 (22.2)
  Grade Ⅰ 20 (44.4) 23 (51.1)
  Grade Ⅱ 11 (24.4) 8 (17.8)
  Grade Ⅲ 6 (13.3) 4 (8.9)

Table 2

Intraoperative variables, stone-free rate and complications"

Variable Group A Group B P
Operative time/min, ${\bar x}$±s 67.1±16.9 72.2±14.8 0.633
Lithotripsy time/min, ${\bar x}$±s 38.0±13.2 40.6±12.6 0.757
Residual stone, n(%) 0.110
  No 39 (86.7) 44 (97.8)
  Yes 6 (13.3) 1 (2.2)
Complications, n(%)
  Haematuria 25 (55.6) 22 (48.9) 0.527
  Pain (mild to moderate) 16 (35.6) 13 (28.9) 0.499
  Bladder irritative symptoms 10 (22.2) 12 (26.7) 0.624
  Low-grade fever 4 (8.9) 2 (4.4) 0.677
1 Drake T , Grivas N , Dabestani S , et al. What are the benefits and harms of ureteroscopy compared with shock-wave lithotripsy in the treatment of upper ureteral stones? A systematic review[J]. Eur Urol, 2017, 72 (5): 772- 786.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.04.016
2 Sun XW , Xia SJ , Lu J , et al. Treatment of large impacted proximal ureteral stones: Randomized comparison of percutaneous antegrade ureterolithotripsy versus retrograde ureterolithotripsy[J]. J Endourol, 2008, 22 (5): 913- 917.
doi: 10.1089/end.2007.0230
3 Allameh F , Razzaghi M , Fallah-Karkan M , et al. Comparison of stone retrieval basket, stone cone and holmium laser: Which one is better in retropulsion and stone-free status for patients with upper ureteral calculi?[J]. J Lasers Med Sci, 2019, 10 (3): 179- 184.
doi: 10.15171/jlms.2019.28
4 Abedi G , Monga M . Flexible ureteroscopy for treatment of upper urinary tract calculus[J]. J Endourol, 2021, 35 (S2): S56- S61.
doi: 10.1089/end.2020.1018
5 Legemate JD , Wijnstok NJ , Matsuda T , et al. Characteristics and outcomes of ureteroscopic treatment in 2 650 patients with impacted ureteral stones[J]. World J Urol, 2017, 35 (10): 1497- 1506.
doi: 10.1007/s00345-017-2028-2
6 Wu WS , Zhang JQ , Yi RXT , et al. Cost-effectiveness of anti-retropulsive devices varies according to the locations of proximal ureteral stones: A retrospective cohort study[J]. BMC Urol, 2022, 22 (1): 43.
doi: 10.1186/s12894-022-00995-9
7 Galal EM , Anwar AZ , El-Bab TKF , et al. Retrospective comparative study of rigid and flexible ureteroscopy for treatment of proximal ureteral stones[J]. Int Braz J Urol, 2016, 42 (5): 967- 972.
doi: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2015.0644
8 Pan JH , Xue W , Xia L , et al. Ureteroscopic lithotripsy in trendelenburg position for proximal ureteral calculi: A prospective, randomized, comparative study[J]. Int Urol Nephrol, 2014, 46 (10): 1895- 1901.
doi: 10.1007/s11255-014-0732-z
9 Jung W , Byun HJ , Lee DS . The role of antegrade irrigation via percutaneous nephrostomy on surgical outcomes in semirigid ure-teroscopy among patients with upper ureteral stones[J]. Biomed Res Int, 2019, 2019, 8657609.
10 Elgebaly O , Abdeldayem H , Idris F , et al. Antegrade mini-percutaneous flexible ureteroscopy versus retrograde ureteroscopy for treating impacted proximal ureteric stones of 1-2 cm: A prospective randomised study[J]. Arab J Urol, 2020, 18 (3): 176- 180.
doi: 10.1080/2090598X.2020.1769385
11 Chen YC , Chen HW , Juan YS , et al. Management of large proximal ureteral calculi: A three-year multicenter experience of simultaneous supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde ure-terolithotripsy[J]. Urol J, 2019, 16 (5): 433- 438.
[1] Youdong LIU, Yajun LYU, Jie CHEN, Mingde ZANG, Hongda PAN, Xiaowen LIU, Jun LU, Fenglin LIU. Clinical efficacy and safety of totally laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy with cardia-gastric fundus preservation in middle-upper gastric cancer [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2026, 58(2): 301-306.
[2] Weihao LI, Xuemin ZHANG, Wei LI, Tao ZHANG, Xiaoming ZHANG. Outcomes of suture-mediated vascular closure device in the closure of left brachial artery access site after thoracic endovascular aortic repair [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2026, 58(2): 388-392.
[3] Ebrahimi Farin, Zhiqiang FENG, Ebrahimi Faraz, Weihua HAN, Ziyang YU, Kuankuan JIA, Jingang AN. Surgical treatment outcomes of different stages of maxillary medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2026, 58(1): 107-114.
[4] Lianfei PAN, Wenjing LI, Ruiyang WANG, Jian JIAO, Zhanqiang CAO, Li GAO, Dong SHI. Short-term efficacy and influencing factors of systemic antibiotics as an adjunct to mechanical periodontal therapy for stages Ⅲ/Ⅳ periodontitis [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2026, 58(1): 30-36.
[5] Xiaoteng YU, Yixuan HUANG, Xinfei LI, Changfu CHEN, Fangzhou ZHAO, Honggang YING, Zihao TAO, Yiming ZHANG, Liqing XU, Zhihua LI, Kunlin YANG, Liqun ZHOU, Xuesong LI, Zheng ZHAO. Surgical techniques and clinical outcomes of upper urinary tract reconstruction for stone-related ureteral strictures [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2025, 57(4): 670-675.
[6] Jinghui JI, Xiushi LIN, Dameng PAN, Zhiying WU, Zixuan XUE, Xiaojun TIAN, Shudong ZHANG, Binshuai WANG, Min QIU. Efficacy of rigid ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy combined with N-trap in the treatment of ureteral stones with a maximum diameter equal to or greater than 1.5 cm [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2025, 57(4): 676-683.
[7] Yuanyuan YANG, Shanshan ZHANG, Guangyan YU, Huijun YANG, Hongyu YANG. Clinical outcomes of partial sialoadenectomy for the treatment of benign tumors in the submandibular gland [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2025, 57(2): 334-339.
[8] Yifan KANG, Yanjun GE, Xiaoming LV, Shang XIE, Xiaofeng SHAN, Zhigang CAI. One-stage mandibular reconstruction combining iliac flap with immediate implant-based denture [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2025, 57(1): 78-84.
[9] Wenjing LI,Baozhou ZHANG,Heng LI,Liangpeng LAI,Hui DU,Ning SUN,Xiaofeng GONG,Ying LI,Yan WANG,Yong WU. Tibiotalocalcaneal arthrodesis for end-stage ankle and hindfoot arthropathy: Short- and mid-term clinical outcomes [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2024, 56(2): 299-306.
[10] Xue ZOU,Xiao-juan BAI,Li-qing ZHANG. Effectiveness of tofacitinib combined with iguratimod in the treatment of difficult-to-treat moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2023, 55(6): 1013-1021.
[11] Min QIU,You-long ZONG,Bin-shuai WANG,Bin YANG,Chu-xiao XU,Zheng-hui SUN,Min LU,Lei ZHAO,Jian LU,Cheng LIU,Xiao-jun TIAN,Lu-lin MA. Treatment outcome of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in patients with renal tumors of moderate to high complexity [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2023, 55(5): 833-837.
[12] Deng-gao LIU,Dan-ni ZHENG,Ya-ning ZHAO,Ya-qiong ZHANG,Xin YE,Li-qi ZHANG,Xiao-yan XIE,Lei ZHANG,Zu-yan ZHANG,Guang-yan YU. Recent progress in the treatment of intractable sialolithiasis [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2023, 55(1): 8-12.
[13] Chun-long ZHANG,Ming-rui WANG,Ming-rui WANG,Ke-xin XU,Tao XU,Hao HU. Long-term efficacy evaluation of coated metal stent implantation for ureteroscopic lithotripsy related refractory ureteral stricture [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2022, 54(4): 674-679.
[14] LI Wei-hao,LI Wei,ZHANG Xue-min,LI Qing-le,JIAO Yang,ZHANG Tao,JIANG Jing-jun,ZHANG Xiao-ming. Comparison of the outcomes between open and hybrid approaches in the treatment of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms repair [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2022, 54(1): 177-181.
[15] Yan-fang JIANG,Jian WANG,Yong-jian WANG,Jia LIU,Yin PEI,Xiao-peng LIU,Ying-fang AO,Yong MA. Mid-to-long term clinical outcomes and predictors after anterior cruciate ligament revision [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2021, 53(5): 857-863.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!