Arguments for choosing extracorporeal shockwave li

Authors: HansGöran Tiselius Christian G Chaussy

Publish Date: 2015/08/28

Volume: 43, Issue: 5, Pages: 387-396

PDF Link

Abstract

At a time when there is an almost unlimited enthusiasm and preference among urologists for endoscopic stone removal we have found it essential to meet some of the frequently presented arguments on why extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy SWL should not be used We have based our considerations in this brief article on our 30–35 years’ experience with the noninvasive or least invasive technique that SWL represents Stone disintegration requirement of repeated treatment sessions the concern of residual fragments complications and economic aspects are some points that are discussedAll procedures performed in studies involving human participants carried out by the authors and referred to in this review were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards

Keywords: