Comparison of Shock Wave Parameters of in Situ ESWL & ESWL After Push Back for Upper Ureteric Calculi

Authors

  • Sakhawat Mahmud Khan Department of Urology, Chittagong Medical College, Chittagong
  • Shahin Akhter Department of Physiology, Chittagong Medical College, Chittagong
  • SAM Golam Kibria Department of Urology, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University, Dhaka
  • Isteaq Ahmed Shamim Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Chittagong General Hospital Chittagong, Chittagong
  • Shireen Akhter Khanam Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Chittagong General Hospital Chittagong, Chittagong

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/cmoshmcj.v16i1.34977

Keywords:

Upper ureteric calculi, In situ ESWL, ESWL after push back, Shock wave session and shock wave energy

Abstract

Background: To compare the shock wave parameters of in situ ESWL & ESWL after push back for upper ureteric calculi.

Methods: This hospital based prospective study was carried out in the Department of Urology, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University (BSMMU) Dhaka from January 2006 to December 2006. For this study, 90 patients were selected according to the selection criteria. They were divided into two groups. Group 1 included 50 patients treated by in situ ESWL and group 2 included 40 patients treated by push back and ESWL. For statistical analysis, student’s t- test & chi-square test were performed.

Results: In group 1 and in group 2 patients mean age were 34.86±11.74 years and 35.12± 12.48 years respectively. In group 1: Over all clearance of calculi was 92.86% in 1cm stones and 86.36% in 1cm stones (p>0.05). In group 2: Total clearance was 100% in stones <1cm size and 88% in1cm size stones (p>0.05). Although clearance rate was higher in push back group it was not statistically significant (92.5% Vs.90%) (p>0.05). Number of ESWL session in case of <1 cm size stone were 1.54 in group 1 and 1.46 in group 2. In case of 1 cm size stone, it was 1.77 in group 1, 1.48 in group 2 (p>0.05). Considering the requirement of shock wave number, less shock wave were required in group 2 (1757.50 ± 255.09) than group 1 (1994 ± 449.22) (p < 0.01). Mean energy needed in group I was 5.07±0.81 and in group 2 it was 4.63±0.48 (p<0.01).

Conclusion: Although more ESWL sessions were required in group 1 than group 2, it was not statistically significant. But mean shock wave number and energy were higher in group 1 than group 2 which was statistically significant.

Chatt Maa Shi Hosp Med Coll J; Vol.16 (1); Jan 2017; Page 7-10

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Abstract
811
PDF
556

Downloads

Published

2017-12-26

How to Cite

Khan, S. M., Akhter, S., Kibria, S. G., Shamim, I. A., & Khanam, S. A. (2017). Comparison of Shock Wave Parameters of in Situ ESWL & ESWL After Push Back for Upper Ureteric Calculi. Chattagram Maa-O-Shishu Hospital Medical College Journal, 16(1), 7–10. https://doi.org/10.3329/cmoshmcj.v16i1.34977

Issue

Section

Original Articles