COMPARATIVE EFFICACY OF EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCKWAVE LITHOTRIPSY AND RETROGRADE INTRARENAL SURGERY IN THE TREATMENT OF CALCIUM OXALATE NEPHROLITHIASIS

Objective To evaluate the results of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the treatment of calcium oxalate nephrolithiasis, as well as the damaging effects on renal function, taking into account the dynamics of blood cystatin C and urine beta2-microglobulin.

Material and Methods Of 94 patients with calcium oxalate nephrolithiasis aged 23–78 included in the study,  42 patients were classified as having undergone ESWL (group I) and 52 patients as having undergone RIRS (group II). Group II patients were then stratified into subset 2A (n = 32) as having undergone RIRS through rigid ureteroscope and subset 2B (n = 20) as having undergone RIRS through flexible ureteroscope. We performed plain urography and nephrosonography at 24–48 hours postoperatively and unenhanced computed tomography 4–6 weeks after surgery. We measured concentrations of serum cystatin C and urinary beta2-microglobulin as a marker for kidney damage. In group I, samples of peripheral blood and
urine were taken before and after the first, third sessions and 30 days after the last ESWL session. In group  II, samples were analyzed before surgery, on the first and 30th postoperative days.

Results The average size of calculi in the group with RIRS was 16.91 ± 2.79 mm, in the group with ESWL  12.31 ± 2.27 mm. The need for reoperation after RIRS was 19.2%, which was lower than after ESWL. Stone-free effect (no stones, or residual stones less than 3 mm) was observed in 95% of cases in patients with RIRS, and in 78% with ESWL. Group I patients demonstrated an increase in the blood leukocytes total number more often than subsets 2A (rigid RIRS) and 2B (flexible RIRS) patients. Leukocyturia was also a more common complication in group I. In the RIRS group, there was no statistically significant change in the level of blood cystatin C and urine beta2-microglobulin, on the contrary, a moderate increase in the endogenous marker of cystatin C was noted after one ESWL session. The increase in urine beta2-microglobulin levels in patients after the first and third ESWL sessions was significantly higher than after RIRS.

Conclusion Flexible RIRS may be suggested as the preferred procedure for patients requiring additional protection of renal function in the treatment of renal stones less than 20 mm. ESWL of stones less than 20 mm can be used as an alternative treatment, since it is characterized by a rather long period of stone eradication from the urinary tract, a high frequency of residual calculi after the procedure, and also has a damaging effect on the renal tissue.

1. Türk AN, Petrik A, Seitz C, et al. EAU Guidelines on Urolithiasis. Limited Text Update March 2017. Accessed February 9, 2021. https://uroweb.org/wp-content/uploads/Urolithiasis-2017-pocket.pdf

2. Talso M, Tefik T, Mantica G, et al. Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: current knowledge and future perspectives. Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2019;71(4):365–372. PMID: 31086132. https://doi.org/10.23736/S0393-2249.19.03415-5

3. Mi Y, Ren K, Pan H, et al. Flexible ureterorenoscopy (F-URS) with holmium laser versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for treatment of renal stone <2 cm: a metaanalysis. Urolithiasis. 2016;44(4):353–365. PMID: 26530230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-015-0832-y

4. Delanaye P, Cavalier E, Morel J, et al. Detection of decreased glomerular filtration rate in intensive care units: serum cystatin C versus serum creatinine. BMC Nephrol. 2014;15:9. PMID: 24410757. PMCID: PMC3893362. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2369-15-9

5. Dharnidharka VR, Kwon Ch, Stevens G. Serum cystatin C is superior to serum creatinine as a marker of kidney function: a meta-analysis. Am J Kidney Dis. 2002;40(2):221–226. PMID: 12148093. https://doi.org/10.1053/ajkd.2002.34487

6. Haase-Fielitz A, Bellomo R, Devarajan P, et al. Novel and conventional serum biomarkers predicting acute kidney injury in adult cardiac surgery: a prospective cohort study. Crit Care Med. 2009;37(2):553–560. PMID: 1911488. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0b013e318195846e

7. Spahillari A, Parikh CR, Sint K, et al. Serum cystatin C–versus creatinine-based definitions of acute kidney injury following cardiac surgery: a prospective cohort study. Am J Kidney Dis. 2012;60(6):922–929. PMID: 22809763. PMCID: PMC3496012. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.2012.06.002

8. Herget-Rosenthal S, Marggraf G, Hüsing J, et al. Early detection of acute renal failure by serum cystatin C. Kidney Int. 2004;66(3):1115–1122. PMID: 15327406. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1755.2004.00861.x

9. Belousov II, Sagakyants AB, Trusov PV, Kogan MI. Safety of mini-PNL in treatment of staghorn stones, large single and multiple kidney stones: monitoring markers of renal functions. Experimental and Clinical Urology. 2019;3:92–99. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.29188/2222-8543-2019-11-3-92-99

10. Nasseh H, Abdi S, Roshani A, Kazemnezhad E. Urinary Beta-2Microglobulin: an indicator of renal tubular damage after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Urol J. 2016;13(6):2911–2915. PMID: 27928813.

11. Mikhaleva LL, Zolotavina ML, Khablyuk VV. Cystatin-C as the reliable biochemical indicator of kidneys filtrational function disturbances in children. Modern Problems of Science and Education. 2012;5. (In Russ.). https://www.science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=7010

12. Turan T, Isman FK, Efiloğlu Ö, et al. The effects of shock wave lithotripsy and retrograde intrarenal surgery on renal function. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2020;31:1–6. PMID: 32228270. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645706.2020.1741388

13. Mamedov EA, Dutov VV, Bazaev VV. Complications of contact ureteral lithotripsy. Urologiia. 2017;4:113–119. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18565/urol.2017.4.113-119

14. Levey AS, Greene T, Kusek J, Beck G. A simplified equation to predict glomerular filtration rate from serum creatinine. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2000;11:155A.

15. Grubb A, Blirup-Jensen S, Lindström V, et al. First certified reference material for cystatin C in human serum ERMDA471/IFCC. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2010;48(11):1619–1621. PMID: 21034257. https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2010.318

16. Bökenkamp A, Domanetzki M, Zinck R, Schumann G, Byrd D, Brodehl J. Cystatin C – a new marker of glomerular filtration rate in children independent of age and height. Pediatrics. 1998;101(5):875–881. PMID: 9565418. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.101.5.875

17. Croda-Todd MT, Soto-Montano XJ, Hernández-Cancino PA, Juárez-Aguilar E. Adult cystatin С reference intervals determined by – nephelometric immunoassay. Clin Biochem. 2007;40(13-14):1084–1087. PMID: 17624320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2007.05.011

18. Trailin AV, Pleten MV, Nikonenko AS, Efimenko NF, Ostapenko TI. The diagnostic value of beta-2-microglobulin, enzymes, interleukins of blood and urine under chronic dysfunction of renal allo-transplantat. Russian Clinical Laboratory Diagnostics. 2015;60(11):31–37. (In Russ.).

19. Dede O, Dağguli M, Utanğaç M, et al. Urinary expression of acute kidney injury biomarkers in patients after RIRS: it is a prospective, controlled study. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015;8(5):8147–8152. PMID: 26221383. PMCID: PMC4509328.

20. Kardakos IS, Volanis DI, Kalikaki A, et al. Evaluation of neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin, interleukin-18, and cystatin C as molecular markers before and after unilateral shock wave lithotripsy. Urology. 2014;84(4):783–788. PMID: 25135871. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2014.05.034

21. Lee FC, Hsi RS, Sorensen MD, et al. Renal vasoconstriction occurs early during shockwave lithotripsy in humans. J Endourol. 2015;29(12):1392–1395. PMID: 26239232. PMCID: PMC4677566. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2015.0315

22. Geraghty R, Abourmarzouk O, Rai B, Biyani ChSh, Rukin NJ, Somani BK. Evidence for ureterorenoscopy and laser fragmentation (URSL) for large renal stones in the modern era. Curr Urol Rep. 2015;16(8):54. PMID: 26077357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-015-0529-3

23. Tokas T, Herrmann TRW, Skolarikos A, et al. Pressure matters: intrarenal pressures during normal and pathological conditions, and impact of increased values to renal physiology. World J Urol. 2019;37(1):125–131. PMID: 29915945. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2378-4

24. Tokas T, Skolarikos A, Herrmann TRW, et al. Pressure matters 2: intrarenal pressure ranges during upper-tract endourological procedures. World J Urol. 2019;37(1):133–142. PMID: 29915944. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2379-3