English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

1 Asso. Prof., 2 Mch Resident Department of Urology, S.C.B. Medical College, Cuttack, Odisha. Correspondng Author Dr Satyajit Samal Email: drkitusraban@gmail.com, Mobile no-9437031992 Abstract Background: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL)is considered a standard treatment for patients with upper-tract stones that are less than 10 mm in diameter, whereas stones that are larger than 20 mm are best managed with PCNL. The management of kidney stones between these sizes remains controversial. Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy with that of percutaneous nephrolithotomy for managing kidney stones measuring between 1 to 2 cm. Material & Methods:This study included 81 patients with moderate-sized kidney stones (range: 1–2 cm) who were posted for surgery for either with PCNL or with ESWL. Success rate, need for auxiliary procedure,duration of hospital stay, retreatment rates, complications, need for blood transfusion and emergency admission were recorded and analyzed. Results: Results of Eighty one patients of renal stones l-2cm size were evaluated in the study with 41 in the ESWL and 40 in the PCNL group .Both the groups were well matched with regards to age and sex distribution. Forty one patients underwent ESWL and30/41 (73%)patients had stone clearance in 1-3 months. Forty patients underwent PCNL out of which 38 (95%) patients had stone clearance. Complications were mostly minor and found in 9.7% in patients undergoing ESWL while same were seen in 30% of those undergoing PCNL. Conclusion: PCNL has proved superior to ESWL for renal stones of 1-2 cm in size. It has also got lower auxiliary and retreatment rates but has its own share of complications.

A Prospective Study of Effectiveness of ESWL versus PCNL in Patients with Kidney Stone Size 1-2 cm