Prognostic factors for extracorporeal shock‐wave lithotripsy of ureteric stones
A multivariate analysis study

References

• Segura JW, Preminger GM, Assimos DG, Dretiler SP, Kahn RI, Lingeman JE, et al. Ureteral Stones Clinical Guidelines Panel summary report on the management of ureteral calculi. The American Urological Association. J Urol 1997; 158: 1915�21.
   Google Scholar
• Mitre AL, Chambo JL, Nahas WC, Cabral BH, Henrique A, Sadi MV, et al. Ureteral calculi: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy performed in situ on an outpatient basis. World J Urol 1992; 10: 213�5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mogensen P, Andersen JT. Primary in situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral calculi. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl 1994; 157: 159�63.
   Google Scholar
• Gnanapragasam VJ, Ramsden PD, Murtly LS, Thomas DJ. Primary in situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in management of ureteric calculi: results with a third generation lithotriptor. BJU Int 1999; 84: 770�4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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�80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pardalidis NP, Kosmaoglou EV, Kapotis CG. Endoscopy vs. extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the treatment of distal ureteral stones. �Ten years� experience. J Endourol 1999; 13: 161�4.
   Google Scholar
• Singal RK, Denstedt JD. Contemporary management of ureteral stones. Urol Clin North Am 1997; 24: 59�70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fetner CD, Preminger GM, Seger J, Lea TA. Treatment of ureteric calculi by extracorporeal shock wave litho-tripsy at multi-user center. J Urol 1988; 139: 1192�4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norusis MJ. Logistic regression analysis. In: SPSS 6.1 advanced statistics user guide. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc., 1994: 1�56.
   Google Scholar
• Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1989.
   Google Scholar
• Ilker NY, Alican Y, Simsek F, Turkeri LN, Ahdas A. Ureteral extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy utilizing the Dornier MFL 5000. J Endourol 1994; 8: 13�4.
   Google Scholar
• Hofbauer J, Tuerk C, Hobarth K, Hasun R, Marberger M. ESWL in situ or ureteroscopy for ureteric stones. World J Urol 1993; 11: 54�8.
   Google Scholar
• Ehreth JT, Drach GW, Arnett ML, Barrett RB, Govan D, Lingeman J, et al. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy; multicenter study of kidney and upper ureter versus middle and lower ureter. J Urol 1994; 152: 1379�85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rauchenwald M, Colombo T, Petritsch Vilits P, Hubmer G. In situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of ureteral calculi with the MPL 9000 lithotriptor. J Urol 1992; 148: 1097�101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cass A. ESWL for stones in the middle third of the ureter (overlying pelvic bone). Urology 1994; 43: 182�5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erturk E, Herrman E, Cockett ATK. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for distal ureteral stones. J Urol 1993; 149: 1425�6.
   Google Scholar
• Tiselius H. Anesthesia free extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of distal ureteral stones without a ureteral catheter. J Endourol 1993; 7: 285�7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clayman RV. Outpatient treatment of middle and lower ureteric stones: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy. J Urol 1999; 162: 1876�7.
   Google Scholar
• Bierkens AF, Hendrikx AJ, De La Rosette, Stultiens GN, Beerlage HP, Arends AJ, et al. Treatment of mid- and lower ureteric calculi: extracorporeal shock-wave litho-tripsy vs. laser ureteroscopy. A comparison of costs, morbidity and effectiveness. Br J Urol 1998; 81: 31�5.
   Google Scholar
• Turk TMT, Jenkins AD. A comparison of ureteroscopy to in situ ESWL for the treatment of distal ureteral calculi. J Urol 1999; 161: 45�6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peschel R, Janetschek G, Bartsch G. ESWL versus URS for distal ureteral calculi. A prospective randomized study. J Urol 1999; 162: 1909�12.
   Google Scholar
• Danuser H, Ackermann DK, Marth DC, Studer UE, Zingg EJ. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in situ or after push-up for upper ureteral calculi. A prospective randomized trial. J Urol 1993; 150: 824�6.
   Google Scholar
• Tiselius HG, Pettersson B, Anderson A. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of stones in the mid ureter. J Urol 1989; 141: 280�2.
   Google Scholar
• Netto NR Jr, Lemos GC, Claro JFA. In situ extracorpor-eal shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral calculi. J Urol 1990; 144: 253�4.
   Google Scholar
• Joshi HB, Obadeyi OO, Rao PN. A comparative analysis of nephrostomy, JJ stent and urgent in situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for obstructing ureteric stones. BJU Int 1999; 84: 264�9.
   Google Scholar
• Whitfield HN. The management of ureteric stones. Part II: Therapy. BJU Int 1999; 84: 916�21.
   Google Scholar
• Ryan PC, Lennon GM, Melean PA, Fitzpatrick JM. The effects of acute and chronic JJ stent placement on upper urinary tract motility and calculus transit. Br J Urol 1994; 74: 434�9.
   Google Scholar
• Bregg K, Riehle RA. Morbidity associated with indwelling internal ureteral stents after shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 1989; 141: 510�2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preminger GM, Kettelhut MC, Elkins SL, Seger J, Fetner CD. Ureteral stenting during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: help or hindrance? J Urol 1989; 142: 32�6.
   Google Scholar
• Ghobish A. In situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of middle and lower ureteral stones: a boosted, stentless, ventral technique. Eur Urol 1998; 34: 93�8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buchholz NP, van Rossum M. Shock wave lithotripsy treatment of radiolucent ureteric calculi with the help of contrast medium. Eur Urol 2001; 39: 200�3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar