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

Objective: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of SWL in the treatment of renal stones over 2 cm retrospectively. Methods: One hundred and nine patients (80 men and 29 women), who had been treated with ESWL because of 2cm or greater renal stones between January 2007 and January 2011, were enrolled to the study. Participants with a renal stone sized between 2 and 2.5 cm were grouped as group 1 and the others with a renal stone over 2.5 cm were grouped as group 2. We comapared the quantity of shock wave, analgesia requirement, efficacy and side effects between groups. A new generation ESWL device, Storz Medical Modulith SLK, was used for treatment. Data of the patients was analysed retrospectively. ESWL was considered successful if residual stone pieces smaller than 3 mm weredetected in a 3 months period. Results: Renal stones were cleaned successfully in 100 (91.7%) patients who had been followed up for three months. There was no significant difference between group 1 and 2 in terms of residual stones. A patient required additional treatment (1.69%) in group 1, while 4 patients (8%) required additional treatment in group 2. Development rate of stone street in group 1 and 2 was 3.38% (2 patients) and 10% (5 patients), respectively. Five patients in both 2 groups required flexible uroterorenoscopy due to residual stones. Analgesic requirement rates were similar in both groups. 82 (75.2%) patients had not required anlgesic, but 27 participants had been administered intramuscular diclofenac or Tradamol. Neither general, spinal or epidural anestesia nor sedation and narcotic analgesia was administered. Haematuria rates in group 1 and 2 were 15.2% and 36%, respectively. There was also no significant difference between groups in terms of skin rash rates. Conclusion: New generation electromagnetic ESWL provides effective and reliable treatment with minimal complications in patients with renal stones over 2 cm. (JAREM 2012; 2: 77-81)

Effectiveness of Shock Wave Lithotripsy (SWL) Treatment of Kidney Stones Larger than Two Centimeter