FUAT KIZILAY, Turan Senem ÖZDEMİR, Burak TURNA, Nursen KARACA, Adnan ŞİMŞİR, Işık ALPER, Oktay NAZLI

Factors affecting the success of pediatric extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy therapy: 26-year experience at a single institution

Despite its widespread use, few studies have evaluated the success of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in pediatric patients with several parameters and a large group of patients. In the present study, we aimed to analyze the factors that affect the outcomes of pediatric ESWL treatment, which we have practiced for 26 years. This study included 1012 pediatric patients who underwent ESWL between March 1991 and November 2017. Pre-procedure radiological evaluations were performed using kidney-ureter-bladder and/or urinary system ultrasonography. Demographic data, stone characteristics, and ESWL treatment data and complications were recorded and univariate and multivariate analyses were performed for the stone-free rate (SFR). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to determine the cut-off values for stone size to predict ESWL success for both kidney and ureteral stones. Age, body mass index (BMI), congenital renal anomaly, stone location, stone size, number of stones, and stone composition significantly affected the SFRs in univariate analysis; however, only age, BMI, stone location, and stone size were significant in the multivariate analysis. If no residual fragments were detected after three sessions of ESWL application, the procedure was considered successful. The cut-off stone size values for the kidney and ureter that predicted treatment success were 96.28 mm2 and 44.16 mm2, respectively. ESWL is an effective and safe treatment in the pediatric age group that provides high SFRs. Age, BMI, and stone location, size, and composition are particularly critical factors that can predict the success of ESWL.

PDF

___

1.Cohen TD, Ehreth J, King LR, Preminger GM. Pediatric urolithiasis: medical and surgical management. Urology 1996; 47: 292-303.

2.Chaussy C, Schmiedt E, Jocham B, Brendel W, Forssmann B, Walther V. First clinical experience with extracorporeally induced destruction of kidney stones by shock waves. J Urol 1982; 127: 417-420.

3.Newman DM, Coury T, Lingeman JE, et al. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy experience in children. J Urol 1986; 136(1 Pt 2): 238-240.

4.Muslumanoglu AY, Tefekli A, Sarilar O, Binbay M, Altunrende F, Ozkuvanci U. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy as first line treatment alternative for urinary tract stones in children: a large scale retrospective analysis. J Urol 2003; 170: 2405-2408.

5.Badawy AA, Saleem MD, Abolyosr A, et al. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy as first line treatment for urinary tract stones in children: outcome of 500 cases. Int Urol Nephrol 2012; 44: 661-666.

6.Marberger M, Türk C, Steinkogler I. Piezoelelectric extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in children. J Urol 1989; 142(2 Pt 1): 349-352.

7.Osti AH, Hofmockel G, Frohmüller H. Ureteroscopic treatment of ureteral stones: only an auxiliary measure of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy or a primary therapeutic option? Urol Int 1997; 59: 177-181.

8.El-Assmy A, El-Nahas AR, Abou-El-Ghar ME, Awad BA, Sheir KZ. Kidney stone size and hounsfield units predict successful shockwave lithotripsy in children. Urology 2013; 81: 880-884.

9.Shokeir AA, Sheir KZ, El-Nahas AR, El-Assmy AM, Eassa W, El-Kappany HA. Treatment of renal stones in children: a comparison between percutaneous nephrolithotomy and shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 2006; 176: 706-710.

10.Turna B, Tekin A, Yağmur İ, Nazlı O. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in infants less than 12-month old. Urolithiasis 2016; 44: 435-440.

11.Dogan HS, Altan M, Citamak B, Bozaci AC, Karabulut E, Tekgul S. A new nomogram for prediction of outcome of pediatric shock-wave lithotripsy. J Pediatr Urol 2015; 11: 84. e1-6.

12.Alsagheer G, Abdel-Kader M, Hasan A, et al. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) monotherapy in children: predictors of successful outcome. J Pediatr Urol 2017; 13: 515.e1-515.e5.

13.El-Nahas AR, El-Assmy AM, Mansour O, Sheir KZ. A prospective multivariate analysis of factors predicting stone disintegration by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: the value of high-resolution noncontrast computed tomography. Eur Urol 2007; 51: 1688-1694.

14.McAdams S, Shukla AR. Pediatric extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: predicting successful outcomes. Indian J Urol 2010; 26: 544-548.

15.Abdel-Khalek M, Sheir KZ, Mokhtar AA, Eraky I, Kenawy M, Bazeed M. Prediction of success rate after extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy of renal stones-a multivariate analysis model. Scand J Urol Nephrol 2004; 38: 161-167.

16.Tunc L, Tokgoz H, Tan MO, Kupeli B, Karaoglan U, Bozkirli I. Stones in anomalous kidneys: results of treatment by shock wave lithotripsy in 150 patients. Int J Urol 2004; 11: 831-836.

17.Bader MJ, Eisner B, Porpiglia F, Preminger GM, Tiselius HG. Contemporary management of ureteral stones. Eur Urol 2012; 61: 764-772.

18.Lu J, Sun X, He L, Wang Y. Efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral stones in children. Pediatr Surg Int 2009; 25: 1109-1112.

19.Jayanthi VR, Arnold PM, Koff SA. Strategies for managing upper tract calculi in young children. J Urol 1999; 162(3 Pt 2): 1234-1237.

20.Gofrit ON, Pode D, Meretyk S, et al. Is the pediatric ureter as efficient as the adult ureter in transporting fragments following extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for renal calculi larger than 10 mm? J Urol 2001; 166: 1862-1864.

21.Ather MH, Noor MA. Does size and site matter for renal stones up to 30-mm in size in children treated by extracorporeal lithotripsy? Urology 2003; 61: 212-215.

22.Önal B, Demirkesen O, Tansu N, Kalkan M, Altintaş R, Yalçin V. The impact of caliceal pelvic anatomy on stone clearance after shock wave lithotripsy for pediatric lower pole stones. J Urol 2004; 172: 1082-1086.

23.Tan MÖ, Karaoğlan Ü, Şen I, Deniz N, Bozkırlı I. The impact of radiological anatomy in clearance of lower calyceal stones after shock wave lithotripsy in paediatric patients. Eur Urol 2003; 43: 188-193.

24.Turk C, Petrik A, Sarica K, et al. EAU Guidelines on Interventional Treatment for Urolithiasis. Eur Urol 2016; 69: 475-482.

25.Demirkesen O, Önal B, Tansu N, Altintaş R, Yalçın V, Öner A. Efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for isolated lower caliceal stones in children compared with stones in other renal locations. Urology 2006; 67: 170-174.

26.Hochreiter WW, Danuser H, Perrig M, Studer UE. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for distal ureteral calculi: what a powerful machine can achieve. J Urol 2003; 169: 878-880.

27.Onal B, Tansu N, Demirkesen O, et al. Nomogram and scoring system for predicting stone-free status after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in children with urolithiasis. BJU Int 2013; 111: 344-35.

28.Tan A, Al-Omar M, Watterson J, Nott L, Denstedt J, Razvi H. Results of shockwave lithotripsy for pediatric urolithiasis. J Endourol 2004; 18: 527-530.

29.Lottmann H, Traxer O, Archambaud F, Mercier-Pageyral B. Monotherapy extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for the treatment of staghorn calculi in children. J Urol 2001; 165(6 Pt 2): 2324-2327.