Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-24 @ 7:24 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2025-12-30 @ 8:17 PM
Study NCT ID:
NCT06722703
Status:
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Last Update Posted:
2024-12-09
First Post:
2024-12-04
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
ESWL Vs Flexible Uretroscopy in Management of Upper Ureteric Stones a Prospective Randomized Study
Sponsor:
Assiut University
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
ESWL Vs Flexible Uretroscopy in Management of Upper Ureteric Stones a Prospective Randomized Study
Status:
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Status Verified Date:
2024-12
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
This comparison between ESWL and flexible ureteroscopy aims to explore the efficacy, safety, and outcomes of these treatments for upper ureteric stones under 15 mm, focusing on stone-free rates, procedural risks, recovery times, and recurrence rates. A thorough understanding of these techniques is essential for optimizing patient outcomes and personalizing treatment strategies.
study aim to evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and cost of SWL compared to flexible uretroscopy in management patients with upper ureteric stone less than 15 mm in size
study aim to evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and cost of SWL compared to flexible uretroscopy in management patients with upper ureteric stone less than 15 mm in size
Detailed Description:
The management of upper ureteric stones, particularly those less than 15 mm in size, has seen significant advancements with the development of minimally invasive techniques. Urolithiasis is a common condition, and selecting the most appropriate treatment is crucial for effective stone clearance and minimizing complications. Two widely used approaches in treating upper ureteric stones are Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) and Flexible Ureteroscopy (FURS).
ESWL, a non-invasive procedure, uses focused shock waves to fragment the stone into smaller pieces that can be passed naturally through the urinary tract. Its non-invasiveness makes it an attractive option for many patients; however, its success is influenced by factors such as stone composition, location, and patient anatomy. In contrast, Flexible Ureteroscopy (FURS) is a minimally invasive endoscopic technique where a flexible ureteroscope is passed through the urinary tract to directly visualize and fragment the stone using a laser (usually a Holmium: YAG laser). This method allows for a more targeted approach and is often used when ESWL is less effective or contraindicated.
ESWL and FURS have distinct advantages and limitations, and the choice between them depends on factors including stone size, density, location, and patient-specific considerations such as body habitus and anatomical variations.
ESWL, a non-invasive procedure, uses focused shock waves to fragment the stone into smaller pieces that can be passed naturally through the urinary tract. Its non-invasiveness makes it an attractive option for many patients; however, its success is influenced by factors such as stone composition, location, and patient anatomy. In contrast, Flexible Ureteroscopy (FURS) is a minimally invasive endoscopic technique where a flexible ureteroscope is passed through the urinary tract to directly visualize and fragment the stone using a laser (usually a Holmium: YAG laser). This method allows for a more targeted approach and is often used when ESWL is less effective or contraindicated.
ESWL and FURS have distinct advantages and limitations, and the choice between them depends on factors including stone size, density, location, and patient-specific considerations such as body habitus and anatomical variations.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
True
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
True
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: