Risk factors of hematoma after SWL for renal calculi: analysis from RCTs and a literature review

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY International Urology and Nephrology Pub Date : 2024-09-18 DOI:10.1007/s11255-024-04205-3
Chris Ho-Ming Wong, Ivan Ching-Ho Ko, Emmy Sui-Fan Tang, Steffi Kar-Kei Yuen, David Ka-Wai Leung, Angel Wing-Yan Kong, Peter Ka-Fung Chiu, Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh, Chi Fai Ng
{"title":"Risk factors of hematoma after SWL for renal calculi: analysis from RCTs and a literature review","authors":"Chris Ho-Ming Wong, Ivan Ching-Ho Ko, Emmy Sui-Fan Tang, Steffi Kar-Kei Yuen, David Ka-Wai Leung, Angel Wing-Yan Kong, Peter Ka-Fung Chiu, Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh, Chi Fai Ng","doi":"10.1007/s11255-024-04205-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Objective</h3><p>To identify risk factors of perinephric hematoma following extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) for renal calculi through combined analysis of two randomized controlled trials.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Patients and methods</h3><p>This post-hoc analysis included adult patients with solitary renal calculi ranging from 5 to 15 mm, treated with SWL between 2016 and 2022. All patients received cross-sectional imaging (either non-contrast computer tomography scan or magnetic resonance imaging) two days post-SWL to assess the presence and severity of perinephric hematoma.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>Among 573 patients analyzed, 173 (30.9%) developed perinephric hematoma by Day 2 post-SWL. Multivariate logistic regression identified higher total energy delivered (odds ratio [OR] = 1.533, <i>p</i> = 0.003), higher mean stone density (OR = 2.603, <i>p</i> = 0.01), higher maximal stone density (OR = 3.578, <i>p</i> = 0.03), and lower pole stone location (OR = 1.545, <i>p</i> = 0.029) were risk factors for the development of hematoma. Conversely, the stepwise ramping protocol was a protective factor for hematoma formation. (OR = 0.572, <i>p</i> = 0.042).</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusions</h3><p>This study elucidates key factors influencing the risk of perinephric hematoma post-SWL, highlighting the importance of procedural adjustments such as the stepwise ramping protocol to reduce complications. These insights call for targeted patient and treatment strategy optimization to enhance SWL safety and efficacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":14454,"journal":{"name":"International Urology and Nephrology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Urology and Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-024-04205-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To identify risk factors of perinephric hematoma following extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) for renal calculi through combined analysis of two randomized controlled trials.

Patients and methods

This post-hoc analysis included adult patients with solitary renal calculi ranging from 5 to 15 mm, treated with SWL between 2016 and 2022. All patients received cross-sectional imaging (either non-contrast computer tomography scan or magnetic resonance imaging) two days post-SWL to assess the presence and severity of perinephric hematoma.

Results

Among 573 patients analyzed, 173 (30.9%) developed perinephric hematoma by Day 2 post-SWL. Multivariate logistic regression identified higher total energy delivered (odds ratio [OR] = 1.533, p = 0.003), higher mean stone density (OR = 2.603, p = 0.01), higher maximal stone density (OR = 3.578, p = 0.03), and lower pole stone location (OR = 1.545, p = 0.029) were risk factors for the development of hematoma. Conversely, the stepwise ramping protocol was a protective factor for hematoma formation. (OR = 0.572, p = 0.042).

Conclusions

This study elucidates key factors influencing the risk of perinephric hematoma post-SWL, highlighting the importance of procedural adjustments such as the stepwise ramping protocol to reduce complications. These insights call for targeted patient and treatment strategy optimization to enhance SWL safety and efficacy.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
肾结石 SWL 术后血肿的风险因素:RCT 分析和文献综述
目标通过对两项随机对照试验的综合分析,确定体外冲击波碎石术(SWL)治疗肾结石后肾周血肿的风险因素。患者和方法这项事后分析纳入了2016年至2022年期间接受SWL治疗的单发肾结石(5至15毫米)成人患者。所有患者在SWL术后两天接受横断面成像(非对比计算机断层扫描或磁共振成像),以评估肾周血肿的存在和严重程度。结果在分析的573名患者中,173人(30.9%)在SWL术后第2天出现肾周血肿。多变量逻辑回归发现,较高的总能量(几率比 [OR] = 1.533,p = 0.003)、较高的平均结石密度(OR = 2.603,p = 0.01)、较高的最大结石密度(OR = 3.578,p = 0.03)和较低的结石位置(OR = 1.545,p = 0.029)是发生血肿的风险因素。相反,阶梯式斜坡方案是血肿形成的保护因素。(结论本研究阐明了影响 SWL 术后肾周血肿风险的关键因素,强调了程序调整(如分步斜坡方案)对减少并发症的重要性。这些见解要求对患者和治疗策略进行有针对性的优化,以提高 SWL 的安全性和有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Urology and Nephrology
International Urology and Nephrology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
329
审稿时长
1.7 months
期刊介绍: International Urology and Nephrology publishes original papers on a broad range of topics in urology, nephrology and andrology. The journal integrates papers originating from clinical practice.
期刊最新文献
Posterior urethral valves: Clinical audits of presentation, diagnostic and therapeutic intervention in a nigerian teaching hospital. A step forward in cardiovascular and renal protection: advocating for finerenone's use in Pakistan. Association between minimal change glomerulopathy and renal cell carcinoma. Beta-blockers in patients with intradialytic hypertension: are they potent anti-hypertensives? Does prior PCNL affect RIRS? A retrospective analysis of a single center data.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1