EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF PNEUMATIC LITHOTRIPSY WITH LASER LITHOTRIPSY IN THE TREATMENT OF URETERAL STONES <20 MILLIMETERS IN CHILDREN: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

Authors

  • Danang Irsayanto Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Airlangga-Indonesia
  • Ida Bagus Gde Tirta Yoga Yatindra Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Airlangga-Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1828-1117
  • Muhammad Rifki Setiawan Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Airlangga-Indonesia
  • Sirin Salsabila Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Airlangga-Indonesia
  • Johan Renaldo Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Airlangga-Indonesia
  • Soetojo Wirjopranoto Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Airlangga-Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55519/JAMC-01-12288

Keywords:

ureteral stones, Ho-YAG, laser lithotripsy, pneumatic lithotripsy, pediatric urolithiasis

Abstract

Background: Ureterorenoscopy (URS) in treating ureteral stones in children is preferred for >10 mm-sized stones. Pneumatic lithotripsy is often used, but laser lithotripsy is gaining more popularity over the years, as it is considered better in terms of safety and efficacy. However, no previous meta-analysis has discussed the comparison of these two modalities. This meta-analysis compared pneumatic and laser lithotripsy in children with ureteral stones. Methods: This meta-analytic study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Inclusion studies were retrieved by thoroughly searching Pubmed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, and Embase databases, focusing on the comparative intervention of pneumatic and laser lithotripsy in the paediatric population. Result: Study analysis showed that laser lithotripsy had a significantly higher stone-free rate (OR: 2.06; 95% CI: 1.06 – 4.00; p=0.03) and lower stone retropulsion (OR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.16–0.87; p=0.02) compared to pneumatic lithotripsy. However, mean operative time (MD: 2.33; 95% CI: -4.09–8.74; p=0.48), length of stay (MD: -0.17; 95% CI: -0.36–0.02; p=0.08), post-operative fever (OR: 1.50; 95% CI: 0.48–4.66; p=0.48), and ureteral injury (OR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.08–2.48; p=0.35) was not different between the two groups. Conclusion: A higher stone-free rate (SFR) and a lower incidence of stone retropulsion can be achieved using laser lithotripsy instead of pneumatic lithotripsy for treating ureteral stones in children.

Author Biographies

Danang Irsayanto, Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Airlangga-Indonesia

 

Ida Bagus Gde Tirta Yoga Yatindra, Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Airlangga-Indonesia

 

Muhammad Rifki Setiawan, Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Airlangga-Indonesia

 

Sirin Salsabila, Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Airlangga-Indonesia

 

Johan Renaldo, Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Airlangga-Indonesia

 

Soetojo Wirjopranoto, Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Airlangga-Indonesia

 

References

Sas DJ, Hulsey TC, Shatat IF, Orak JK. Increasing Incidence of Kidney Stones in Children Evaluated in the Emergency Department. J Pediatr 2010;157(1):132–7.

VanDervoort K, Wiesen J, Frank R, Vento S, Crosby V, Chandra M, et al. Urolithiasis in Pediatric Patients: A Single Center Study of Incidence, Clinical Presentation and Outcome. J Urol 2007;177(6):2300–5.

Kairam N, Allegra JR, Eskin B. Rise in Emergency Department Visits of Pediatric Patients for Renal Colic From 1999 to 2008. Pediatr Emerg Care 2013;29(4):462–4.

Minevich E. Management of ureteric stone in pediatric patients. Indian J Urol 2010;26(4):564.

Yapanoğlu T, Aydin HR, Aksoy Y, Özbey İ. Ureteroscopic management of distal ureteral stones in children: holmium: YAG laser vs. pneumatic lithotripsy. Turkish J Med Sci 2009;39(4):623–628.

Koura AC, Ravish IR, Amarkhed S, Nerli RB, Reddy M. Ureteroscopic stone management in prepubertal children. Pediatr Surg Int 2007;23(11):1123–6.

Bapat SS, Pai K V, Purnapatre SS, Yadav PB, Padye AS. Comparison of Holmium Laser and Pneumatic Lithotripsy in Managing Upper-Ureteral Stones. J Endourol 2007;21(12):1425–8.

Cordes J, Nguyen F, Lange B, Brinkmann R, Jocham D. Damage of Stone Baskets by Endourologic Lithotripters: A Laboratory Study of 5 Lithotripters and 4 Basket Types. Adv Urol 2013;2013:1–6.

Razvi HA, Denstedt JD, Chun SS, Sales JL. Intracorporeal Lithotripsy With the Holmium:YAG Laser. J Urol 1996;156(3):912–4.

Raza A, Turna B, Smith G, Moussa S, Tolley DA. Pediatric urolithiasis: 15 years of local experience with minimally invasive endourological management of pediatric calculi. J Urol 2005;174(2):682–5.

Kim SS, Kolon TF, Canter D, White M, Casale P. Pediatric Flexible Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy: The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia Experience. J Urol 2008;180(6):2616–9.

Reddy PP, Barrieras DJ, Bägli DJ, McLorie GA, Khoury AE, Merguerian PA. Initial experience with endoscopic holmium laser lithotripsy for pediatric urolithiasis. J Urol 1999;162(5):1714–6.

Safwat AS, Bissada NK, Kumar U, Taha MI, Abdel-hafez SES, Eltaher AM, et al. Experience with ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy in children. Pediatr Surg Int 2008;24(5):579–81.

Kızılay F, Kalemci S, Turna B, Şimşir A, Nazlı O. Ho:YAG laser versus pneumatic lithotripsy for management of pediatric ureteral stones: a prospective–comparative analysis with adults. J Pediatr Urol 2020;16(1):35.e1–35.e7.

Yuksel OH, Akan S, Urkmez A, Uruc F, Verit A. Efficacy and safety of semirigid ureteroscopy combined with holmium: YAG laser in the treatment of upper urinary tract calculi: Is it a good alternative treatment option of flexible ureteroscopy for developing countries? J Pak Med Assoc 2015;65(11):1193–6.

Mustafa M, Al Zabadi H, Mansour S, Nabulsi A. Endoscopic Management of Upper and Lower Ureteric Stones Using Pneumatic Lithotripter: A Retrospective Medical Records Review. Res Rep Urol 2023;15:77–83.

Życzkowski M, Bogacki R, Nowakowski K, Muskała B, Rajwa P, Bryniarski P, et al. Application of Pneumatic Lithotripter and Holmium Laser in the Treatment of Ureteral Stones and Kidney Stones in Children. Biomed Res Int 2017;2017:2505034.

Gurocak S, Tan MO, Ak E, Atay I, Ahmadov F, Farahvash A, et al. Laser or Pneumatic Lithotripsy in Pediatric Ureteral Stones: Which One is More Effective? Gazi Med J 2015;26(3):82–4.

Atar M, Bodakci MN, Sancaktutar AA, Penbegul N, Soylemez H, Bozkurt Y, et al. Comparison of pneumatic and laser lithotripsy in the treatment of pediatric ureteral stones. J Pediatr Urol 2013;9(3):308–12.

Jhanwar A, Bansal A, Sankhwar S, Kumar M, Kanodia G, Prakash G. Outcome analysis of holmium laser and pneumatic lithotripsy in the endoscopic management of lower ureteric calculus in pediatric patients: a prospective study. Int Braz J Urol 2016;42(6):1178–82.

Tan MO, Kirac M, Onaran M, Karaoglan U, Deniz N, Bozkirli I. Factors affecting the success rate of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for renal calculi in children. Urol Res 2006;34(3):215–21.

Lockhart K, McIlwain E, David G, Raman A. Urosepsis and fever after laser lithotripsy procedures in a single Australian institution. J Clin Urol 2020;13(5):343–8.

Jeon SS, Hyun JH, Lee KS. A comparison of holmium:YAG laser with Lithoclast lithotripsy in ureteral calculi fragmentation. Int J Urol 2005;12(6):544–7.

Kucukdurmaz F, Efe E, Sahinkanat T, Amasyalı AS, Resim S. Ureteroscopy With Holmium:Yag Laser Lithotripsy for Ureteral Stones in Preschool Children: Analysis of the Factors Affecting the Complications and Success. Urology 2018;111:162–7.

Downloads

Published

2024-04-17

Issue

Vol. 36 No. 1 (2024): JOURNAL OF AYUB MEDICAL COLLEGE ABBOTTABAD

Section

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Danang Irsayanto, Ida Bagus Gde Tirta Yoga Yatindra, Muhammad Rifki Setiawan, Sirin Salsabila, Johan Renaldo, Soetojo Wirjopranoto

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Journal of Ayub Medical College, Abbottabad is an OPEN ACCESS JOURNAL which means that all content is FREELY available without charge to all users whether registered with the journal or not. The work published by J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad is licensed and distributed under the creative commons License  CC BY ND Attribution-NoDerivs. Material printed in this journal is OPEN to access, and are FREE for use in academic and research work with proper citation. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad accepts only original material for publication with the understanding that except for abstracts, no part of the data has been published or will be submitted for publication elsewhere before appearing in J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. The Editorial Board of J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad makes every effort to ensure the accuracy and authenticity of material printed in J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. However, conclusions and statements expressed are views of the authors and do not reflect the opinion/policy of J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad or the Editorial Board.

USERS are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.

AUTHORS retain the rights of free downloading/unlimited e-print of full text and sharing/disseminating the article without any restriction, by any means including twitter, scholarly collaboration networks such as ResearchGate, Academia.eu, and social media sites such as Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Scholar and any other professional or academic networking site.