TY - DATA T1 - Erratum: Efficacy Management of Urolithiasis: Flexible Ureteroscopy versus Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy PY - 2017/07/25 AU - Tauber V. AU - Wohlmuth M. AU - Hochmuth A. AU - Schimetta W. AU - Krause F.S. UR - https://karger.figshare.com/articles/dataset/Erratum_Efficacy_Management_of_Urolithiasis_Flexible_Ureteroscopy_versus_Extracorporeal_Shockwave_Lithotripsy/5241853 DO - 10.6084/m9.figshare.5241853.v1 L4 - https://ndownloader.figshare.com/files/8956576 KW - SWL KW - Stone free KW - Complication KW - fURS KW - Urolithiasis KW - Lower pole calyx N2 - Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of flexible ureterscopy (fURS) and extracorporal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) in the treatment of urolithiasis, complemented by a subgroup analysis of lower pole calyx. Methods: Retrospective analysis of patients treated by fURS or SWL was performed by independent variables such as gender, age, nephrolith size, double-J stent (DJ stent) and stone localisation. Results: Out of 326 patients, 165 were treated by SWL and 161 by fURS. Complete stone removal was achieved by fURS in 83.2% and by SWL in 43.0% (p < 0.001). Asymptomatic behaviour (88-89%) and complication rate (10-11%) were nearly the same in both methods. A higher retreatment rate for SWL was necessary; otherwise, an auxillary DJ stent was performed more often preoperative before fURS. The subgroup analysis of lower pole calyx confirmed these evaluations. Conclusions: Complete stone-free removal was almost 8 times higher after fURS compared to SWL. The efficacy of fURS in treatment of urolithiasis is substantially higher than the efficacy of SWL. ER -