Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy Versus Ureteroscopy: A Comparison of Intraoperative Radiation Exposure During the Management of Nephrolithiasis
Both shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) and ureteroscopy (URS) may be used in the treatment of similar stones and both need fluoroscopic imaging to achieve this. Fluoroscopy, however, is a source of ionizing radiation. The purpose of this study is to compare the effective radiation dose (ERD) between patie...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of endourology 2012-06, Vol.26 (6), p.597-601 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 601 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 597 |
container_title | Journal of endourology |
container_volume | 26 |
creator | REBUCK, David A COLEMAN, Sarah CHEN, Jian-Feng CASEY, Jessica T PERRY, Kent T NADLER, Robert B |
description | Both shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) and ureteroscopy (URS) may be used in the treatment of similar stones and both need fluoroscopic imaging to achieve this. Fluoroscopy, however, is a source of ionizing radiation. The purpose of this study is to compare the effective radiation dose (ERD) between patients undergoing SWL vs URS.
The ERD was measured among consecutive patients who were undergoing either SWL or URS between January 2010 and February 2011. For SWL, ERD was calculated using fluoroscopic exposure time, current, voltage, skin-to-source distance, and field size. For URS, it was calculated from the measured dose-area product. We measured several patient and stone factors. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.
A total of 190 patients were included (87 SWL and 103 URS). In the univariate analyses, no differences were found in ERD (7.32 vs 6.00 mSv, P=0.262 and 7.23 vs 6.07 mSv, P=0.198, for renal and ureteral stones, respectively). In the multivariate analyses, among renal stones, SWL was associated with a higher ERD than URS (β=2.06, P=0.026), and body mass index and stone size were also significant predictors (β=0.212, P=0.045 and β=0.452, P=0.004, respectively). Among ureteral stones, no differences were found (β=0.425, P=0.674), and only the presence of a stent was related to ERD (β=2.53, P=0.013).
Among patients with renal stones, SWL was associated with a modest increase in ERD compared with URS, but for ureteral stones, both modalities were associated with similar levels of radiation. This information may be relevant for frequent stone formers needing treatments for which cumulative exposures may become significant. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1089/end.2011.0185 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1018862935</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1018862935</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c323t-d048936e608dd7559574cc16e309b135bf53c74dab4918b50360e1f7d7bb2363</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkUFv1DAQhS0EosvCkSvyBYlLtna8tuPeqmWBSttWgoK4RY4z6ZomsWs70P0f_OB61W17mpHmmzd68xB6T8mCkkodw9guSkLpgtCKv0AzyrksFCG_X6JZnpeFlIocoTcx_iGEMkHZa3RUUiUJE2KG_q_vUtDGBe8C6B7_2Dpz80__BbyxaetSsD7u8C8IcYr4Z4AEwUXj_O4En-KVG7wONroRuw6fjVnJeQg62bz_Xbc2d3m2vvMuTgHw5ynY8RqnLeBzPeprGGBM-9UL8Nvg-nzR6mjjW_Sq032Ed4c6R1df1lerb8Xm8uvZ6nRTGFayVLRkWSkmQJCqbSXnisulMVQAI6qhjDcdZ0YuW90sFa0anh0ToJ1sZdOUTLA5-vQg64O7nSCmerDRQN_rEdwUa5pfWolSMZ7R4gE12X4M0NU-2EGHXYbqfQ51zqHe51Dvc8j8h4P01AzQPtGPj8_AxwOgo9F9F_RobHzmuBKK8JLdA66sk-M</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1018862935</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy Versus Ureteroscopy: A Comparison of Intraoperative Radiation Exposure During the Management of Nephrolithiasis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>REBUCK, David A ; COLEMAN, Sarah ; CHEN, Jian-Feng ; CASEY, Jessica T ; PERRY, Kent T ; NADLER, Robert B</creator><creatorcontrib>REBUCK, David A ; COLEMAN, Sarah ; CHEN, Jian-Feng ; CASEY, Jessica T ; PERRY, Kent T ; NADLER, Robert B</creatorcontrib><description>Both shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) and ureteroscopy (URS) may be used in the treatment of similar stones and both need fluoroscopic imaging to achieve this. Fluoroscopy, however, is a source of ionizing radiation. The purpose of this study is to compare the effective radiation dose (ERD) between patients undergoing SWL vs URS.
The ERD was measured among consecutive patients who were undergoing either SWL or URS between January 2010 and February 2011. For SWL, ERD was calculated using fluoroscopic exposure time, current, voltage, skin-to-source distance, and field size. For URS, it was calculated from the measured dose-area product. We measured several patient and stone factors. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.
A total of 190 patients were included (87 SWL and 103 URS). In the univariate analyses, no differences were found in ERD (7.32 vs 6.00 mSv, P=0.262 and 7.23 vs 6.07 mSv, P=0.198, for renal and ureteral stones, respectively). In the multivariate analyses, among renal stones, SWL was associated with a higher ERD than URS (β=2.06, P=0.026), and body mass index and stone size were also significant predictors (β=0.212, P=0.045 and β=0.452, P=0.004, respectively). Among ureteral stones, no differences were found (β=0.425, P=0.674), and only the presence of a stent was related to ERD (β=2.53, P=0.013).
Among patients with renal stones, SWL was associated with a modest increase in ERD compared with URS, but for ureteral stones, both modalities were associated with similar levels of radiation. This information may be relevant for frequent stone formers needing treatments for which cumulative exposures may become significant.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0892-7790</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1557-900X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1089/end.2011.0185</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21970366</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Larchmont, NY: Liebert</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Biological and medical sciences ; Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation ; Female ; Humans ; Intraoperative Care ; Lithotripsy - adverse effects ; Lithotripsy - methods ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Multivariate Analysis ; Nephrolithiasis - therapy ; Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases ; Ureteroscopy - adverse effects ; Ureteroscopy - methods ; Urinary lithiasis ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Journal of endourology, 2012-06, Vol.26 (6), p.597-601</ispartof><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c323t-d048936e608dd7559574cc16e309b135bf53c74dab4918b50360e1f7d7bb2363</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c323t-d048936e608dd7559574cc16e309b135bf53c74dab4918b50360e1f7d7bb2363</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=25969052$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21970366$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>REBUCK, David A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>COLEMAN, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CHEN, Jian-Feng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CASEY, Jessica T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PERRY, Kent T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>NADLER, Robert B</creatorcontrib><title>Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy Versus Ureteroscopy: A Comparison of Intraoperative Radiation Exposure During the Management of Nephrolithiasis</title><title>Journal of endourology</title><addtitle>J Endourol</addtitle><description>Both shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) and ureteroscopy (URS) may be used in the treatment of similar stones and both need fluoroscopic imaging to achieve this. Fluoroscopy, however, is a source of ionizing radiation. The purpose of this study is to compare the effective radiation dose (ERD) between patients undergoing SWL vs URS.
The ERD was measured among consecutive patients who were undergoing either SWL or URS between January 2010 and February 2011. For SWL, ERD was calculated using fluoroscopic exposure time, current, voltage, skin-to-source distance, and field size. For URS, it was calculated from the measured dose-area product. We measured several patient and stone factors. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.
A total of 190 patients were included (87 SWL and 103 URS). In the univariate analyses, no differences were found in ERD (7.32 vs 6.00 mSv, P=0.262 and 7.23 vs 6.07 mSv, P=0.198, for renal and ureteral stones, respectively). In the multivariate analyses, among renal stones, SWL was associated with a higher ERD than URS (β=2.06, P=0.026), and body mass index and stone size were also significant predictors (β=0.212, P=0.045 and β=0.452, P=0.004, respectively). Among ureteral stones, no differences were found (β=0.425, P=0.674), and only the presence of a stent was related to ERD (β=2.53, P=0.013).
Among patients with renal stones, SWL was associated with a modest increase in ERD compared with URS, but for ureteral stones, both modalities were associated with similar levels of radiation. This information may be relevant for frequent stone formers needing treatments for which cumulative exposures may become significant.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intraoperative Care</subject><subject>Lithotripsy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Lithotripsy - methods</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Multivariate Analysis</subject><subject>Nephrolithiasis - therapy</subject><subject>Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases</subject><subject>Ureteroscopy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Ureteroscopy - methods</subject><subject>Urinary lithiasis</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0892-7790</issn><issn>1557-900X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpFkUFv1DAQhS0EosvCkSvyBYlLtna8tuPeqmWBSttWgoK4RY4z6ZomsWs70P0f_OB61W17mpHmmzd68xB6T8mCkkodw9guSkLpgtCKv0AzyrksFCG_X6JZnpeFlIocoTcx_iGEMkHZa3RUUiUJE2KG_q_vUtDGBe8C6B7_2Dpz80__BbyxaetSsD7u8C8IcYr4Z4AEwUXj_O4En-KVG7wONroRuw6fjVnJeQg62bz_Xbc2d3m2vvMuTgHw5ynY8RqnLeBzPeprGGBM-9UL8Nvg-nzR6mjjW_Sq032Ed4c6R1df1lerb8Xm8uvZ6nRTGFayVLRkWSkmQJCqbSXnisulMVQAI6qhjDcdZ0YuW90sFa0anh0ToJ1sZdOUTLA5-vQg64O7nSCmerDRQN_rEdwUa5pfWolSMZ7R4gE12X4M0NU-2EGHXYbqfQ51zqHe51Dvc8j8h4P01AzQPtGPj8_AxwOgo9F9F_RobHzmuBKK8JLdA66sk-M</recordid><startdate>20120601</startdate><enddate>20120601</enddate><creator>REBUCK, David A</creator><creator>COLEMAN, Sarah</creator><creator>CHEN, Jian-Feng</creator><creator>CASEY, Jessica T</creator><creator>PERRY, Kent T</creator><creator>NADLER, Robert B</creator><general>Liebert</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120601</creationdate><title>Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy Versus Ureteroscopy: A Comparison of Intraoperative Radiation Exposure During the Management of Nephrolithiasis</title><author>REBUCK, David A ; COLEMAN, Sarah ; CHEN, Jian-Feng ; CASEY, Jessica T ; PERRY, Kent T ; NADLER, Robert B</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c323t-d048936e608dd7559574cc16e309b135bf53c74dab4918b50360e1f7d7bb2363</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intraoperative Care</topic><topic>Lithotripsy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Lithotripsy - methods</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Multivariate Analysis</topic><topic>Nephrolithiasis - therapy</topic><topic>Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases</topic><topic>Ureteroscopy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Ureteroscopy - methods</topic><topic>Urinary lithiasis</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>REBUCK, David A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>COLEMAN, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CHEN, Jian-Feng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CASEY, Jessica T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PERRY, Kent T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>NADLER, Robert B</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of endourology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>REBUCK, David A</au><au>COLEMAN, Sarah</au><au>CHEN, Jian-Feng</au><au>CASEY, Jessica T</au><au>PERRY, Kent T</au><au>NADLER, Robert B</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy Versus Ureteroscopy: A Comparison of Intraoperative Radiation Exposure During the Management of Nephrolithiasis</atitle><jtitle>Journal of endourology</jtitle><addtitle>J Endourol</addtitle><date>2012-06-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>597</spage><epage>601</epage><pages>597-601</pages><issn>0892-7790</issn><eissn>1557-900X</eissn><abstract>Both shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) and ureteroscopy (URS) may be used in the treatment of similar stones and both need fluoroscopic imaging to achieve this. Fluoroscopy, however, is a source of ionizing radiation. The purpose of this study is to compare the effective radiation dose (ERD) between patients undergoing SWL vs URS.
The ERD was measured among consecutive patients who were undergoing either SWL or URS between January 2010 and February 2011. For SWL, ERD was calculated using fluoroscopic exposure time, current, voltage, skin-to-source distance, and field size. For URS, it was calculated from the measured dose-area product. We measured several patient and stone factors. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.
A total of 190 patients were included (87 SWL and 103 URS). In the univariate analyses, no differences were found in ERD (7.32 vs 6.00 mSv, P=0.262 and 7.23 vs 6.07 mSv, P=0.198, for renal and ureteral stones, respectively). In the multivariate analyses, among renal stones, SWL was associated with a higher ERD than URS (β=2.06, P=0.026), and body mass index and stone size were also significant predictors (β=0.212, P=0.045 and β=0.452, P=0.004, respectively). Among ureteral stones, no differences were found (β=0.425, P=0.674), and only the presence of a stent was related to ERD (β=2.53, P=0.013).
Among patients with renal stones, SWL was associated with a modest increase in ERD compared with URS, but for ureteral stones, both modalities were associated with similar levels of radiation. This information may be relevant for frequent stone formers needing treatments for which cumulative exposures may become significant.</abstract><cop>Larchmont, NY</cop><pub>Liebert</pub><pmid>21970366</pmid><doi>10.1089/end.2011.0185</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0892-7790 |
ispartof | Journal of endourology, 2012-06, Vol.26 (6), p.597-601 |
issn | 0892-7790 1557-900X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1018862935 |
source | MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Adolescent Adult Biological and medical sciences Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation Female Humans Intraoperative Care Lithotripsy - adverse effects Lithotripsy - methods Male Medical sciences Middle Aged Multivariate Analysis Nephrolithiasis - therapy Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases Ureteroscopy - adverse effects Ureteroscopy - methods Urinary lithiasis Young Adult |
title | Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy Versus Ureteroscopy: A Comparison of Intraoperative Radiation Exposure During the Management of Nephrolithiasis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T03%3A53%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Extracorporeal%20Shockwave%20Lithotripsy%20Versus%20Ureteroscopy:%20A%20Comparison%20of%20Intraoperative%20Radiation%20Exposure%20During%20the%20Management%20of%20Nephrolithiasis&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20endourology&rft.au=REBUCK,%20David%20A&rft.date=2012-06-01&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=597&rft.epage=601&rft.pages=597-601&rft.issn=0892-7790&rft.eissn=1557-900X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1089/end.2011.0185&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1018862935%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1018862935&rft_id=info:pmid/21970366&rfr_iscdi=true |