Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 12, 2026

A Two-Step Method for Percutaneous Transhepatic Choledochoscopic Lithotomy
Published on: September 13, 2022
Comparative analysis of renal calculi treatment via different extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) pathways
Shuai Yuan1,2, Ramaiyan Velmurugan3, S Prasanna Bharathi3
1Department of Urology, Shanxi Bethune Hospital, Shanxi Academy of Medical Sciences, Tongji Shanxi Hospital, Third Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, 030032, China. yuan1987shuai@outlook.com.
Objective:
To compare the efficacy and safety of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) for treating renal calculi under different shock wave pathways.
Methods:
This study involved a prospective analysis of clinical data obtained from 264 eligible patients with renal stones treated at the Urology Department of Shanxi Bethune Hospital between January 2021 and June 2023. Among these patients, 125 underwent ESWL via the dorsal shock wave pathway (Group A), while 139 patients underwent ESWL via the ipsilateral clavicular midline shock wave pathway (Group B). Preoperatively, all patients underwent non-contrast abdominal CT (NCCT) scans to assess stone count, diameter, CT values, and Skin-to-Stone Distance (SSD). Intraoperatively, ultrasonography was utilized to remeasure SSD and monitor stone fragmentation continuously. The ESWL procedure employed a standardized intermittent stepwise energy escalation technique until treatment completion. Various metrics, including intraoperative Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scores, number of shocks, total shock wave energy, stone-free rate (SFR) at 4 weeks post-operation, and postoperative complication rates, were recorded and subjected to statistical analysis.
Results:
There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups regarding gender, age, BMI, stone count, stone diameter, stone CT values, intraoperative VAS pain scores, and postoperative complication rates (P>0.05). Preoperative SSD was significantly higher in Group B than in Group A (P<0.05), but there were no significant differences in intraoperative SSD between the groups (P>0.05). Group B showed significantly lower total shock wave energy and number of shocks compared to Group A (P<0.05). The stone-free rate (SFR) after 4 weeks did not exhibit significant differences between the groups (P>0.05). However, when the stone diameter was ≥1.3 cm, the SFR at 4 weeks post-operation in Group B was significantly higher than in Group A (P<0.05).
Conclusion:
ESWL emerges as a safe and efficacious approach for treating renal calculi. Our findings suggest that utilizing the ipsilateral clavicular midline shock wave pathway in ESWL necessitates less shock wave energy and enhances efficiency, particularly in cases with larger stone burdens.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Urinary Tract Calculi I: Introduction
Urinary Tract Calculi II: Pathophysiology and Clinical Manifestations
Urinary Tract Calculi III: Medical Management
Urinary Tract Calculi IV: Nutrition Therapy and Prevention
Urinary Tract Calculi V: Nursing Management
Urinary Tract Calculi VI: Surgical Management

