4.3 Review

How can and should we optimize extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy?

Journal

UROLITHIASIS
Volume 46, Issue 1, Pages 3-17

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00240-017-1020-z

Keywords

SWL; Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy; Indications; Treatment strategies; Precautions; Renal stones; Ureteral stones

Ask authors/readers for more resources

It is well recognized that the popularity of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL), despite its non-invasive character, has decreased during recent years. This is partly explained by the technological achievements in endoscopy and urologists' enthusiasm for such procedures. Another explanation is that many urologists have been insufficiently successful with SWL. The latter effect might to some extent be a result of the performance of the lithotripter used, but in too many cases, it is evident that the principles of how shock wave lithotripsy should be carried out are poorly applied. The purpose of this article is to emphasize some important aspects on how SWL best should be used. Based on decades of experience, it stands to reason that success with SWL does not come automatically and attention has to be paid to all details of this technique.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available