Published 2017-03-16
Fajar Nugroho Yuniarso Untung Tranggono


Objective: To know if pre-morbid factors such as maximum power, maximum frequency, repeated extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), age, hypertension, diabetic, nutrition, blood coagulation disorders, kidney function disorders, pain perception, stone burden, and stone location, can be use to predict ESWL complication. Material & methods: This study is done retrospectively. Analysis was done on 50 patients undergoing ESWL between July 2014 to December 2015. Free variables which evaluated were maximum power, maximum frequency, repeated ESWL, age, hypertension, diabetic, nutrition, blood coagulation disorders, kidney function disorders, pain perception, stone burden, and stone location. Dependent variable which evaluated was steinstrasse event, post ESWL fever, post-ESWL renal colic, post-ESWL hematuria. Age variable were distributed normally and done bivariate analysis by student T-test. Others were abnormally distributed and analyzed univariately by Mann U Whitney. Results: During study period, 50 patients were collected. Among them, 60% were men and 40% were women. Mean age of patients undergo ESWL were 50.9 +12.7 years. Mean stone size that undergo ESWL were 172.7 + 277.8 mm2. Patients with hypertension before ESWL were 9 patients. Stones were mostly located on kidney pyelum (29 patients), inferior calix (11 patients), superior calix (5 patients), middle calix (4 patients), and 1 patients has staghorn stone. After ESWL, none of the patients complaining severe pain, 35 patient complaining mild pain, and 15 patient complaining moderate pain. Repeated ESWL done in 16 patients (32%). Post-ESWL complication such as hematuria happened on 12 patients, steinstrasse on 1 patient, and colic on 6 patients. None of patients complaining fever. Repeated ESWL happened on 32% patients and have complication risk of hematuria (p=0.043). Hypertension is significantly effecting on hematuria event after ESWL (p=0.015). Conclusion: Hypertension and repeated ESWL can be used as predicting factor of hematuria complication.



Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy, post ESWL complication


Charig CR, Webb DR, Payne SR, Wickham JEA. Comparison of treatment of renal calculi by open surgery, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. BMJ. 1986; 292: 879-82.

Cleveland RO, Bailey MR, Hartenbaum B, Fineberg N, Lokhandwalla M, McAteer JA, et al. Design and characterization of a research electrohydraulic lithotripter patterned after the Dornier HM3; Review of Scientific Instrument. 2000; 71: 2154-525.

Matlaga R, Lingeman E. Surgical management of upper urinary tract calculi, In: Wein AJ, ed. Campbell-Walsh Urology. 10th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier; 2011: chap 48.

Delvecchio F, Auge BK, Munver R, Brown SA, Brizuela R, Zhong P, et al. Shock wave lithotripsy causes ipsilateral renal injury remote from the focal point: The role of regional vasoconstriction. J Urol. 2003; 169: 1526–9.

Egilmez T, Tekin MI, Gonen M, Kilinc F, Goren R, Ozkardes H. Efficacy and safety of a new-generation shockwave lithotripsy machine in the treatment of single renal or ureteral stones: Experience with 2670 patients. J Endourol. 2007; 21(1): 23–27.

El-Assmy A, El-Nahas AR, Abo-Elghar ME. Predictors of success after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for renal calculi between 20–30 mm: A Multivariate Analysis Model. ScientificWorld Journal. 2006; 6: 2388–90.

Abe T, Akakura K, Kawaguchi M. Outcomes of shockwave lithotripsy for upper urinary-tract stones: A large-scale study at a single institution. J Endourol. 2005; 19(7): 768–73.

Karlsen SJ, Smevik B, Hovig T. Acute morphological changes in canine kidneys after exposure to extracorporeal shock waves: A light and electron microscopic study. Urol Res. 1991; 19: 105–15.

Streem SB, Yost A, Mascha E. Clinical implications of clinically insignificant stone fragments after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol. 1996; 155(4): 1186–90.

Macmahon HE. Renal changes in hypertension; Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine. Yale J Biol Med. Oct 1935; 8(1): 23–30.

Salem S, Mehrsai A, Zartab H. Complications and outcomes following extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: A prospective study of 3,241 patients. Urol Res. 2010; 38: 135–42.

Mezentsev VA. Extracorporeal shock wave Llithotripsy in the treatment of renal pelvicalyceal stones in morbidly obese patient. Int Braz J Urol. March-April 2005; 31(2): 105-10.

Greenstein A, Matzkin H. Does the rate of extracorporeal shock wave delivery affect stone fragmentation? Urology. 1999; 54(3): 430–2.

Madbouly K, El-Tiraifi AM, Seida M, El-Faqih SR, Atassi R, Talic RF. Slow versus fast shock wave lithotripsy rate for urolithiasis: A prospective randomized study. J Urol. 2005; 173(1): 127–30.

Krambeck AE, Gettman MT, Rohlinger AL. Diabetes mellitus and hypertension associated with shock wave lithotripsy of renal and proximal ureteral stones at 19 years of follow-up. J Urol. 2006; 175: 1742-7.

McAteer JA, Evan AP. The acute and long-term adverse effects of shock wave lithotripsy. Semin Nephrol. 2008; 28: 200-13.

Kukreja R, Desai M, Patel SH, Desai MR. Nephrolithiasis associated with renal insufficiency: Factors predicting outcome. J Endourol. December 2003; 17(10).

Copyright Information
Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine/Airlangga University