Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the treatment of renal pelvicalyceal stones in morbidly obese patients.
BACKGROUND
Management of urolithiasis in morbidly obese patients is usually associated with higher morbidity and mortality compared to non-obese patients. In morbidly obese patients, since the kidney and stone are at a considerable distance from the skin (compared to non-obese patients) difficulty may be found in positioning the patient so that the stone is situated at the focal point of the lithotripter.


OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the outcomes and cost-efficiency of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in the treatment of renal pelvicalyceal stones sized between 6 and 20 mm in morbidly obese patients.


METHODS
Using various aids, such as mobile overtable module, extended shock pathway and abdominal compression 37 patients with body mass index more than 40 kg/m2 were treated using the Siemens Lithostar-plus third generation lithotripter. The size of renal pelvicalyceal stones was between 6 and 20 mm. Treatment costs for shock wave lithotripsy were calculated.


RESULTS
The overall stone free rate at 3 months of 73% was achieved. The mean number of treatments per patient was 2.1. The post-lithotripsy secondary procedures rate was 5.4%. No complications, such as subcapsular haematoma or acute pyelonephritis were recorded. The most effective (87% success rate) and cost-efficient treatment was in the patients with pelvic stones. The treatment of the patients with low caliceal stones was effective in 60% only. The cost of the treatment of the patients with low calyceal stones was in 1.8 times higher than in the patients with pelvic stones.


CONCLUSIONS
We conclude that ESWL with the Siemens Lithostar-plus is the most effective and cost-efficient in morbidly obese patients with pelvic stones sized between 6 and 20 mm. 87% success rate was achieved. The increased distance from the skin surface to the stone in those patients does not decrease the success rate provided the stone is positioned in the focal point or within 3 cm of it on the extended shock pathway. ESWL should not be considered as the first line of treatment in the morbidly obese patients with low caliceal stones where the stone was positioned more than 1 cm from the focal point on the extended shock pathway.
Mezentsev
V A
VA
Department of Urology, Moscow Regional Scientific Research Clinical Institute, Moscow, Russia. vitalimezentsev@hotmail.com
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D015992:Body Mass Index; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D005260:Female; D017048:Health Care Costs / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D006801:Humans; D007669:Kidney Calculi / Q000628:therapy*; D008096:Lithotripsy / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009767:Obesity, Morbid / Q000150:complications*; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D016896:Treatment Outcome