Matched pair analysis of ureteroscopy vs. shock wave lithotripsy for the treatment of upper ureteric calculi

Summary There is controversy over whether shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) or ureteroscopy (URS) is the best management of ureteric calculi, especially for stones located in the upper ureter. This study compares URS and SWL management of upper ureteric stones directly for the first time using a different analysis tool, the matched pair analysis study design. This method enables meaningful comparisons to be made on a small number of matched patients, using precise like‐for‐like matching. Adult patients undergoing primary treatment of solitary radiopaque proximal ureteric stones were identified. Patients with stents, nephrostomies or stones at the pelvi‐ureteric junction were excluded. Patients had a minimum of 3 months follow‐up. Patients treated by primary URS were matched using four parameters (sex, laterality, stone size and location) to patients treated on a Dornier Compact Delta Lithotriptor. A total of 1479 patients had URS or SWL from which 27 upper ureteric stone matched pairs were identified. Three‐month stone free rates were 82% for URS and 89% for SWL (McNemar's test, p = 0.625). Re‐treatment was required in 11% and 26% following URS and SWL respectively (p = 0.219). Forty‐one per cent of URS patients required an ancillary treatment, such as stent removal, compared with only 22% of SWL patients (p = 0.227). Introduction of a holmium:YAG laser for use with URS improved the stone free rate for URS to 100%. Using a robust like‐for‐like comparison of similar patients with very similar upper ureteric stones the outcomes following SWL and URS were comparable. Choice of treatment should therefore be based on parameters such as availability of equipment, waiting times and patient preference.