Shock-wave lithotripsy or ureterorenoscopy for renal stones?

Pietro Manuel Ferraro, Francesco Pinto, Giovanni Gambaro

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review


Kidney stones are a common condition with high direct and indirect costs; to date, the optimal urological approach for some particular presentations including non-lower pole kidney stones between 10 and 20mmof diameter is not clear. A limited number of randomized controlled trials and observational longitudinal studies suggests that ureterorenoscopy (URS) could be superior to shock-wave lithotripsy (SWL) in achieving stone-free rates in this setting; however, such reports are generally weakened by a number of limitations including small sample size and scarce control for confounding. In this issue, Fankhauser et al. [1] report the results of a large observational retrospective study on the comparative efficacy and safety of URS and SWL for the treatment of previously untreated kidney stones.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)362-363
Number of pages2
JournalClinical Kidney Journal
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - Jun 1 2018


  • Endourology
  • Lithotripsy
  • Nephrolithiasis
  • Observational studies
  • Outcomes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nephrology
  • Transplantation


Dive into the research topics of 'Shock-wave lithotripsy or ureterorenoscopy for renal stones?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this