Aim: There are some controversies on the effectiveness of
extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and ureteroscopic stone
extraction (URS) in ureteral stones. Because, previous studies on this
topic mostly included lower ureteral stones, we aimed to compare
effectiveness of these two methods in both lower and upper ureteral
Method: After diagnosis of urolithiasis, ESWL or URS was performed to
patients. Stone-free ratio, complications and necessity of an additional
intervention for both procedures were recorded. The decision about
the selection of method was made based on the patients’ choice.
Upper and lower ureteral stones were included, while middle ureteral
stones were excluded from the study.
Result: Total number of patients undergone URS was 90 and ESWL
was 96. There was no difference in male/female ratio, age and stone
diameters between two groups (P>0.05). Upper ureteral stones were
found to be more frequent in ESWL group than those in URS group
(55.2% vs. 33.3%, respectively, P=0.004). Total stone-free ratio was
97.8% for URS and 68.8% for ESWL (P<0.001). Ratios of treatment
failures and complications were found to be lower in URS group
compared with ESWL group (P<0.05).
Conclusion: Although, URS seems to be more successful in the
treatment of ureteral stones, further prospective studies with more
patients are needed to clarify our results.