We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
A Prospective Randomized Study Comparing the Effect of Different Kidney Protection Treatment Protocols on Acute Renal Injury After Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy.
Journal of Endourology 2017 January
OBJECTIVES: To perform a prospective study to evaluate the renal protective effects of ramping protocol and pause protocol for extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) in human subjects.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred twenty patients with solitary renal stone <15 mm were randomized to receive one of four protocols: (1) 80% power from beginning until the end of treatment; (2) the first 100 shockwaves (SWs) at 40% power, and then 80% power until the end of treatment; (3) the first 100 shocks at 40% power, followed by a 3-minute pause, and then further SWs at 80% power until the end of treatment; and (4) the first 100 shocks at 80% power, followed by a 3-minute pause, and then further SWs at 80% power until the end of treatment. The primary endpoint was the incidence of renal hematoma assessed by imaging on day 2. Spot urine samples were also collected before and after treatment for acute renal injury marker measurement.
RESULTS: The baseline information and treatment parameters of the four groups were comparable. The overall incidence of hematoma formation was 7.69% (24 patients). The number of patients developing hematoma in the four groups was 8 (10.26%), 7 (8.97%), 6 (7.59%), and 3 (3.90%), respectively, and the incidence of hematoma among the four groups was not significantly different. Only patient's body mass index and mean blood pressure during treatment were predictors for hematoma formation. There was also no significant difference in changes in the levels of all markers and complication and hospitalization rates between the four groups.
CONCLUSION: Comprehensive assessment of clinical parameters, imaging results, and urinary markers showed no obvious improvement in post-SWL renal insult by either protocol.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred twenty patients with solitary renal stone <15 mm were randomized to receive one of four protocols: (1) 80% power from beginning until the end of treatment; (2) the first 100 shockwaves (SWs) at 40% power, and then 80% power until the end of treatment; (3) the first 100 shocks at 40% power, followed by a 3-minute pause, and then further SWs at 80% power until the end of treatment; and (4) the first 100 shocks at 80% power, followed by a 3-minute pause, and then further SWs at 80% power until the end of treatment. The primary endpoint was the incidence of renal hematoma assessed by imaging on day 2. Spot urine samples were also collected before and after treatment for acute renal injury marker measurement.
RESULTS: The baseline information and treatment parameters of the four groups were comparable. The overall incidence of hematoma formation was 7.69% (24 patients). The number of patients developing hematoma in the four groups was 8 (10.26%), 7 (8.97%), 6 (7.59%), and 3 (3.90%), respectively, and the incidence of hematoma among the four groups was not significantly different. Only patient's body mass index and mean blood pressure during treatment were predictors for hematoma formation. There was also no significant difference in changes in the levels of all markers and complication and hospitalization rates between the four groups.
CONCLUSION: Comprehensive assessment of clinical parameters, imaging results, and urinary markers showed no obvious improvement in post-SWL renal insult by either protocol.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app