Effect of the External Physical Vibration Lithecbole on the Discharge of Upper Urinary Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Vol. 18 No. 01 (2021),
17 March 2021
Purpose: The external physical vibration lithecbole (EPVL) is a new device that accelerates the discharge of urinary stones by changing the patient's body position and providing multi-directional simple harmonic waves. It is clinically employed to improve the stone-free rate (SFR). However, it is not widely accepted in clinical practice due to the lack of high-level evidentiary support and a standard protocol. The present meta-analysis aims at the evaluation of the efficacy and safety of EPVL treatment in improving the SFR.
Methods: This study was a systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic literature review was conducted
using PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Medline, the Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library to find randomized controlled trials (RCTs) as recent as April 2020 that evaluated the efficacy and safety of EPVL treatment for patients with stones/residual stones in the upper urinary tract. Results: In total, 7 prospective studies with 1414 patients were included. Compared with patients in the control group, patients treated with an EPVL (the intervention group) had higher SFRs (95% CI: 0.59-0.86, RR = 0.71, P = .0004) and lower complication rates (95% CI: 1.37-3.12, RR = 2.07, P = .0006). In a subgroup analysis based on previous surgery (ESWL, RIRS), the intervention group had an improved SFR as compared to the control group (95% CI: 0.59-0.95, RR = 0.75, P = .02; 95% CI: 0.56-0.73, RR = 0.64, P < .00001, respectively). In a subgroup analysis based on stone location, the SFRs for stones in the upper/middle/lower calyx and renal pelvis were significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group: for residual stones in the upper and middle calyx, 95% CI: 0.63-0.98, RR = 0.79, and P = .03; for residual stones in the lower calyx, 95% CI: 0.54-0.75, RR = 0.64, and P < .00001; for residual stones in the renal pelvis, 95% CI: 0.47-0.79, RR = 0.61, and P = .0002. However, the SFRs for ureter stones were not significantly different between groups (95% CI: 0.82 -1.05, RR = 0.93, P = .23).
Conclusion: The external physical vibration lithecbole can effectively improve the SFR after ESWL and RIRS
without significant side effects, especially for residual stones in the upper/middle/lower calyx and renal pelvis.
- extracorporeal physical vibrational lithecbole, residual stones, Upper urinary tract
How to Cite
2. Farhan, M., et al., Prospective evaluation of outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy using the ‘STONE’nephrolithometry score: A single-centre experience. Arab journal of urology, 2015. 13(4): p. 264-269.
3. Raja, A., Z. Hekmati, and H.B. Joshi, How do urinary calculi influence health-related quality of life and patient treatment preference: a systematic review. Journal of endourology, 2016. 30(7): p. 727-743.
4. Honey, R.J.D.A., et al., Mechanical percussion inversion can result in relocation of lower pole stone fragments after shock wave lithotripsy. Urology, 2000. 55(2): p. 204-206.
5. Pace, K.T., et al., Mechanical percussion, inversion and diuresis for residual lower pole fragments after shock wave lithotripsy: a prospective, single blind, randomized controlled trial. The Journal of urology, 2001. 166(6): p. 2065-2071.
6. BUCHHOLZ, N.-P., S. MEIER-PADEL, and G. RUTISHAUSER, Minor residual fragments after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: spontaneous clearance or risk factor for recurrent stone formation? Journal of endourology, 1997. 11(4): p. 227-232.
7. Liu, L.R., et al., Percussion, diuresis, and inversion therapy for the passage of lower pole kidney stones following shock wave lithotripsy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2013(12).
8. Tan, Y.K., et al., In vitro comparison of prototype magnetic tool with conventional nitinol basket for ureteroscopic retrieval of stone fragments rendered paramagnetic with iron oxide microparticles. The Journal of urology, 2012. 188(2): p. 648-652.
9. Shah, A., et al., Focused ultrasound to expel calculi from the kidney. The Journal of urology, 2012. 187(2): p. 739-743.
10. Long, Q., et al., A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial of the Efficacy of External Physical Vibration Lithecbole after Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for a Lower Pole Renal Stone Less Than 2 cm. The Journal of urology, 2016. 195: p. 965-70.
11. Zhang, Y., et al., When is the best time to perform external physical vibration lithecbole (EPVL) after retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS): a multi-center study based on randomized controlled trials. Urolithiasis, 2019.
12. Liu, G., et al., Treatment of distal ureteral calculi using extracorporeal physical vibrational lithecbole combined with tamsulosin: a new option to speed up obstruction relief. Journal of endourology, 2018. 32(2): p. 161-167.
13. Tao, R., et al., External physical vibration lithecbole facilitating the expulsion of upper ureteric stones 1.0-2.0 cm after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: a prospective randomized trial. Urolithiasis, 2020. 48(1): p. 71-77.
14. Wu, W., et al., How to accelerate the upper urinary stone discharge after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) for < 15 mm upper urinary stones: a prospective multi-center randomized controlled trial about external physical vibration lithecbole (EPVL). World journal of urology, 2018. 36(2): p. 293-298.
15. Wu, W., et al., External Physical Vibration Lithecbole Promotes the Clearance of Upper Urinary Stones after Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial. The Journal of urology, 2017. 197(5): p. 1289-1295.
16. Jing, S., et al., Modified Mechanical Percussion for Upper Urinary Tract Stone Fragments After Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy: A Prospective Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial. Urology, 2018. 116: p. 47-54.
17. Raman, J., et al., Natural history of residual fragments following percutaneous nephrostolithotomy. The Journal of urology, 2009. 181(3): p. 1163-8.
18. Burgher, A., et al., Progression of nephrolithiasis: long-term outcomes with observation of asymptomatic calculi. Journal of endourology, 2004. 18(6): p. 534-9.
19. Chung, D., et al., Comparison of stone-free rates following shock wave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal stones: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. PloS one, 2019. 14(2): p. e0211316.
20. Wen, C.C. and S.Y. Nakada, Treatment selection and outcomes: renal calculi. Urologic Clinics of North America, 2007. 34(3): p. 409-419.
21. Brownlee, N., et al., Controlled inversion therapy: an adjunct to the elimination of gravity-dependent fragments following extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. The Journal of urology, 1990. 143(6): p. 1096-1098.
22. Sampaio, F. and A. Aragao, Inferior pole collecting system anatomy: its probable role in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. j Urol, 1992. 147(2): p. 322-324.
- Abstract Viewed: 0 times
- 6417/pdf Downloaded: 0 times