Comparison of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy and surgical lithotomy regarding patient satisfaction

A series of 19 patients who underwent extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for urolithiasis was compared with 26 patients who were treated with surgical lithotomy (SL). A historical clinical trial was conducted using hospital chart records and telephone interviews to determine differences in outcome between the two groups. The ESWL group had significantly (p less than 0.05) shorter duration of post-procedural pain, fewer requirements for pain medications, and decreased anxiety toward repetition of the procedure than did the SL group. In addition, the ESWL group had significantly (p less than 0.05) shorter hospital stays, faster return to work on discharge from the hospital, and less physical limitation after the procedure. There was no appreciable difference in the occurrence of post-procedure urinary tract infections or in the patient's perception of the effectiveness of the procedure. These findings support the conclusion that treatment of urolithiasis by ESWL, is preferable to open flank SL.