Which Method Is More Effective for the Treatment of 1-2 cm Renal Pelvis Stones in Obese Patients: Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy or Flexible Ureterorenoscopy?

Objective: This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and complications of obese patients who underwent extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and flexible ureterorenoscopy (FURS) for treating 1-2 cm renal pelvic stones.
Methods: This study included 89 patients with a body mass index (BMI) >30 who underwent ESWL and FURS surgeries for 10-20 mm renal pelvic stones between January 2015 and July 2023. Three months after the treatments, patients underwent full abdominal computed tomography (CT) and were examined for stone-free status and the presence of residual stones. The presence of ≥4 mm residual stones on imaging was considered a failure, and these patients were treated again. Demographic data, stone characteristics, stone-free rate (SFR) three months after the procedure, surgery/procedure time, and complications such as bleeding, urosepsis, and collecting system perforation were compared between the groups.
Results: The patients included in the study were divided into two groups: ESWL (n=46) and FURS (n=43). Demographic and clinical data were similar between the groups. Retreatment rates were higher in the ESWL group compared to the FURS group. The mean procedure time was similar between the groups (p=0.085). The three-month SFR was found to be higher in the FURS group (88.3% vs. 73.9%; p=0.043). There was no difference in complication rates between groups.
Conclusion: FURS is a more effective treatment method than ESWL in obese patients with stones 1-2 cm in size located in the renal pelvis.
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
(Copyright © 2024, Karkin et al.)