Erratum: Efficacy Management of Urolithiasis: Flexible Ureteroscopy versus Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy
2017-07-25T13:59:25Z (GMT) by
<b><i>Objectives:</i></b> 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. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> 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. <b><i>Results:</i></b> 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. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> 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.