There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.
Abstract
Background:
This study investigated the use of ultrasound-guided extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy
(ESWL) to break stones in the genitourinary tract and prevent genitourinary injury.
Our goals were to achieve accurate focusing and minimal X-ray exposure for the benefit
of the patients.
Methods:
The LiteMed LM-9200 lithotripter with ultrasonography and fluoroscopy was used for
two different procedures: autoaimed and autoperiodical. These procedures enabled dual
focusing on stone localization and tracking.
Results:
Out of 108 patients who underwent autoperiodical procedures, 29 had no gross hematuria.
Among the 335 patients who received autoaimed procedures, 194 had no gross hematuria.
The average duration of X-ray exposure during autoperiodical and autoaimed procedures
was 120 and 50 s, respectively.
Conclusion:
The ultrasound-guided ESWL with minimal X-ray exposure was found to be useful in treating
genitourinary upper-tract urolithiasis in the autoaimed procedure. Patients who underwent
the autoaimed procedure experienced less gross hematuria compared to those who underwent
the autoperiodical procedure.
Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common disorder in which the two main clinical features are pelvic pain and lower urinary tract symptoms. There are currently many approaches for its management, using both pharmacological and non‐pharmacological interventions. The National Institute of Health ‐ Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH‐CPSI) score is a validated measure commonly used to measure CP/CPPS symptoms. To assess the effects of non‐pharmacological therapies for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases, trial registries, grey literature and conference proceedings with no restrictions on the language of publication or publication status. The date of the latest search of all databases was August 2017. We included randomised controlled trials. Inclusion criteria were men with a diagnosis of CP/CPPS. We included all available non‐pharmacological interventions. Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data from the included studies, performed statistical analyses and rated quality of evidence (QoE) according to the GRADE methods. We included 38 unique studies with 3290 men with CP/CPPS across 23 comparisons. 1. Acupuncture: (three studies, 204 participants) based on short‐term follow‐up, acupuncture reduces prostatitis symptoms in an appreciable number of participants compared with sham procedure (mean difference (MD) in total NIH‐CPSI score ‐5.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) ‐7.32 to ‐4.26, high QoE). Acupuncture likely results in little to no difference in adverse events (moderate QoE). It probably also decreases prostatitis symptoms compared with standard medical therapy in an appreciable number of participants (MD ‐6.05, 95% CI ‐7.87 to ‐4.24, two studies, 78 participants, moderate QoE). 2. Circumcision: (one study, 713 participants) based on short‐term follow‐up, early circumcision probably decreases prostatitis symptoms slightly (NIH‐CPSI score MD ‐3.00, 95% CI ‐3.82 to ‐2.18, moderate QoE) and may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events compared with control (a waiting list to be circumcised, low QoE). 3. Electromagnetic chair: (two studies, 57 participants) based on short‐term follow‐up, we are uncertain of the effects of the use of an electromagnetic chair on prostatitis symptoms. It may be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events compared with sham procedure (low to very low QoE). 4. Lifestyle modifications: (one study, 100 participants) based on short‐term follow‐up, lifestyle modifications may be associated with a greater improvement in prostatitis symptoms in an appreciable number of participants compared with control (risk ratio (RR) for improvement in NIH‐CPSI scores 3.90, 95% CI 2.20 to 6.92, very low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events. 5. Physical activity: (one study, 85 participants) based on short‐term follow‐up, a physical activity programme may cause a small reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH‐CPSI score MD ‐2.50, 95% CI ‐4.69 to ‐0.31, low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events. 6. Prostatic massage: (two studies, 115 participants) based on short‐term follow‐up, we are uncertain whether the prostatic massage reduces or increases prostatitis symptoms compared with control (very low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events. 7. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy: (three studies, 157 participants) based on short‐term follow‐up, extracorporeal shockwave therapy reduces prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH‐CPSI score MD ‐6.18, 95% CI ‐7.46 to ‐4.89, high QoE). These results may not be sustained at medium‐term follow‐up (low QoE). This treatment may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events (low QoE). 8. Transrectal thermotherapy compared to medical therapy: (two studies, 237 participants) based on short‐term follow‐up, transrectal thermotherapy alone or in combination with medical therapy may decrease prostatitis symptoms slightly when compared with medical therapy alone (NIH‐CPSI score MD ‐2.50, 95% CI ‐3.82 to ‐1.18, low QoE). One included study reported that participants may experience transient adverse events. 9. Other interventions: there is uncertainty about the effects of other interventions included in this review. We found no information regarding psychological support or prostatic surgery. Some of the interventions can decrease prostatitis symptoms in an appreciable number without a greater incidence of adverse events. The QoE was mostly low. Future clinical trials should include a full report of their methods including adequate masking, consistent assessment of all patient‐important outcomes including potential treatment‐related adverse events and appropriate sample sizes. Review question What are the effects of non‐medicine therapies in men with longstanding pain and discomfort around their prostate and pelvis, so‐called chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS)? Background CP/CPPS is a common disorder in which men feel pelvic pain or have bothersome symptoms (or both of these) when urinating. Its cause is unknown and there are many different treatments for this condition. Study characteristics The evidence was current to August 2017. We found 38 studies that were conducted between 1993 and 2016 with 3187 participants that made 23 comparisons between different treatments in men with CP/CPPS. The evaluated interventions usually implied the use of devices, medical advice or some form of physical therapy. In many cases, these therapies were given to men in an outpatient setting. Most studies did not specify their funding sources; three studies reported funding from device makers. Key results Acupuncture: we found that acupuncture (an alternative medicine where thin needles are inserted into the skin at specific points) decrease symptoms in an appreciable number of men and is probably not associated with side effects when compared with pretend acupuncture. It probably decreases symptoms when compared with standard medical therapy. Circumcision: we found that men who were circumcised (removal of the foreskin of the penis) probably have fewer symptoms (small effect) and may not have more side effects when compared to men who delay circumcision. Electromagnetic chair: we are uncertain of the effects of the use of an electromagnetic chair (a device that provides magnetic stimulation to the pelvis) on men's symptoms; however, it may not be associated with a greater incidence of side effects when compared with a simulated procedure (where researchers pretended to but did not actually use the device). Lifestyle modifications: we are uncertain whether the recommendation of lifestyle modifications reduces symptoms when compared to the continuation of the same lifestyle. We had no information regarding side effects. Physical activity: we found that a physical activity programme may reduce symptoms (small effect) when compared with a non‐specific activity used as a control. We have no information regarding side effects. Prostatic massage: we are uncertain whether the prostatic massage reduces or increases symptoms when compared with no massage. We found no information regarding side effects. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy: we found that extracorporeal shockwave therapy (where shock waves are passed through the skin to the prostate) decreases appreciably symptoms compared to a simulated procedure. These results may not be lasting after more continued treatment. This treatment may not be associated with side effects. Transrectal thermotherapy compared to medical therapy: we found that transrectal thermotherapy (which applies heat to the prostate and pelvic muscle area) alone or in combination with medical therapy may cause a small decrease in symptoms compared to medical therapy alone. One of the included studies reported that participants may experience transient side effects. There is uncertainty about the effects of other interventions. Quality of the evidence The quality of the evidence was low in most cases, meaning that there is much uncertainty surrounding the results. The included studies were not well designed, had a small sample size and had a short follow‐up time (usually 12 weeks).
Purpose To evaluate ureteral stenting as a negative predictive factor influencing ureteral stone clearance and to estimate the probability of one-session success in shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) patients with a ureteral stone. Materials and Methods We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 1,651 patients who underwent their first SWL. Among these patients, 680 had a ureteral stone measuring 4–20 mm and were thus eligible for our study. The 57 patients who underwent ureteral stenting during SWL were identified. Maximal stone length (MSL), mean stone density (MSD), skin-to-stone distance (SSD), and stone heterogeneity index (SHI) were determined by pre-SWL noncontrast computed tomography. Results After propensity score matching, 399 patients were extracted from the total patient cohort. There were no significant differences between stenting and stentless groups after matching, except for a higher one-session success rate in the stentless group (78.6% vs. 49.1%, p=0.026). In multivariate analysis, shorter MSL, lower MSD, higher SHI, and absence of a stent were positive predictors for one-session success in patients who underwent SWL. Using cutoff values of MSL and MSD obtained from receiver operator curve analysis, in patients with a lower MSD (≤784 HU), the success rate was lower in those with a stent (61.1%) than in those without (83.5%) (p=0.001). However, in patients with a higher MSL (>10 mm), the success rate was lower in those with a stent (23.6%) than in those without (52.2%) (p=0.002). Conclusions Ureteral stenting during SWL was a negative predictor of one-session success in patients with a ureteral stone.
We developed a real-time tracking system for renal stones that decreases the number of shock waves and treatment time of shock wave lithotripsy. Ultrasound images were analyzed to identify the renal stones. A computer software module for ultrasound image processing was developed to monitor stone location instantaneously. Another computer software module controlled generator movement in real time for tracking the stone. We used 13 ultrasound stone trajectories recorded from patients to test the system in vitro. Two tests were established to verify tracking system reliability. One test focused on improvement in the coincidence ratio, which denotes the matching extent of the stone within the effective focal area. The other test focused on improvement in the efficiency ratio, that is a decrease in the number of shocks for stone fragmentation. For each recorded stone trajectory 2 experiments were done under tracking and nontracking conditions. The average coincidence and efficiency ratios plus or minus standard deviation were 79.6% +/- 9.8% and 45.0% +/- 12.7% without tracking, and 97.0% +/- 3.0% and 85.5 +/- 6.8% with tracking, respectively. All tests were statistically significant (paired t test p <0.01). An ultrasound based real-time tracking system proved to be significantly helpful for in vitro lithotripsy. It appears that the tracking system may greatly decrease the number of shocks and treatment time for renal stones.
Publisher:
SAGE Publications
(Sage UK: London, England
)
ISSN
(Print):
0036-8504
ISSN
(Electronic):
2047-7163
Publication date
(Electronic):
22
December
2023
Publication date Collection: Oct-Dec 2023
Volume: 106
Issue: 4
Electronic Location Identifier: 00368504231220988
Affiliations
[1
]Department of Urology, Shuang Ho Hospital, School of Medicine, College of Medical,
Ringgold 38032, universityTaipei Medical University; , Taipei, Taiwan
[2
]Department of Urology, Heping Campus, Ringgold 38010, universityTaipei City Hospital; , Taipei, Taiwan
[3
]Department of Anatomy, School of Medicine, Ringgold 56081, universityChang Gung University; , Tao-Yuan, Taiwan
[5
]Department of Urology, Shuang Ho Hospital, Shuang Ho Cancer Center, Taipei Cancer
Center, School of Medicine, College of Medical, Ringgold 38032, universityTaipei Medical University; , Taipei, Taiwan
Author notes
[*]
Equally contribution.
[*]Ke-Hung Tsui, Innovative Medical Association, Department of Urology, Shuang Ho Hospital,
College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Email:
t2130@
123456s.tmu.edu.tw
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial
4.0 License (
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without
further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE
and Open Access page (
https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.
Smart Citations