191 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16502057)
21. The impact of pelvicaliceal features on problematic lower pole stone clearance in different age groups.
Gurocak S; Kupeli B; Acar C; Tan MO; Karaoglan U; Bozkirli I
Int Urol Nephrol; 2008; 40(1):31-7. PubMed ID: 17619163
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. The efficacy of radiographic anatomical measurement methods in predicting success after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for lower pole kidney stones.
Arpali E; Altinel M; Sargin SY
Int Braz J Urol; 2014; 40(3):337-45. PubMed ID: 25010316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for solitary lower calyceal stone: a statistical model.
Srivastava A; Zaman W; Singh V; Mandhani A; Kumar A; Singh U
BJU Int; 2004 Feb; 93(3):364-8. PubMed ID: 14764139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Do anatomic factors pose a significant risk in the formation of lower pole stones?
Manikandan R; Gall Z; Gunendran T; Neilson D; Adeyoju A
Urology; 2007 Apr; 69(4):620-4. PubMed ID: 17445636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Is the gravity effect of radiographic anatomic features enough to justify stone clearance or fragments retention following extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL).
Mustafa M
Urol Res; 2012 Aug; 40(4):339-44. PubMed ID: 21847556
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Predictive factors of lower calyceal stone clearance after Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy (ESWL): a focus on the infundibulopelvic anatomy.
Ghoneim IA; Ziada AM; Elkatib SE
Eur Urol; 2005 Aug; 48(2):296-302; discussion 302. PubMed ID: 16005376
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Differences in computed tomography density of the renal papillae of stone formers and non-stone-formers: a pilot study.
Eisner BH; Iqbal A; Namasivayam S; Catalano O; Kambadakone A; Dretler SP; Sahani DV
J Endourol; 2008 Oct; 22(10):2207-10. PubMed ID: 18831676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Pelvicaliceal anatomical variation between stone bearing and normal contralateral kidneys--does it have an impact on stone formation in pediatric patients with a solitary lower caliceal stone?
Gurocak S; Kupeli B; Acar C; Guneri C; Tan MO; Bozkirli I
J Urol; 2006 Jan; 175(1):270-5; discussion 275. PubMed ID: 16406924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. The influence of pelvicalyceal system anatomy on minimally invasive treatments of patients with renal calculi.
van Zanten P; Weltings S; Roshani H
Abdom Radiol (NY); 2020 Apr; 45(4):1174-1180. PubMed ID: 31676921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Significance of lower-pole pelvicaliceal anatomy on stone clearance after shockwave lithotripsy in nonobstructive isolated renal pelvic stones.
Sozen S; Kupeli B; Acar C; Gurocak S; Karaoglan U; Bozkirli I
J Endourol; 2008 May; 22(5):877-81. PubMed ID: 18643718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Is stone clearance after shockwave lithotripsy in patients with solitary upper-caliceal stone influenced by anatomic differences in the pelvicaliceal system?
Küpeli B; Acar C; Gürocak S; Güneri C; Karaoglan U; Bozkirli I
J Endourol; 2007 Jan; 21(1):18-22. PubMed ID: 17263602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Impact of lower pole anatomy on stone clearance after shock wave lithotripsy.
Juan YS; Chuang SM; Wu WJ; Shen JT; Wang CJ; Huang CH
Kaohsiung J Med Sci; 2005 Aug; 21(8):358-64. PubMed ID: 16158878
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. The Association of a Number of Anatomical Factors with the Success of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery in Lower Calyceal Stones.
Sari S; Ozok HU; Topaloglu H; Cakici MC; Ozdemir H; Karakoyunlu AN; Senturk AB; Ersoy H
Urol J; 2017 Jul; 14(4):4008-4014. PubMed ID: 28670667
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. [Renal morphology and urodynamic factors for renal stone formation].
Ishikawa Y
Nihon Hinyokika Gakkai Zasshi; 1995 Feb; 86(2):263-72. PubMed ID: 7897927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Stone clearance in lower pole nephrolithiasis after extra corporeal shock wave lithotripsy - the controversy continues.
Ather MH; Abid F; Akhtar S; Khawaja K
BMC Urol; 2003 Jan; 3():1. PubMed ID: 12546707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Clearance of lower-pole stones following shock wave lithotripsy: effect of the infundibulopelvic angle.
Keeley FX; Moussa SA; Smith G; Tolley DA
Eur Urol; 1999 Nov; 36(5):371-5. PubMed ID: 10516444
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Impact of renal anatomy on shock wave lithotripsy outcomes for lower pole kidney stones: results of a prospective multifactorial analysis controlled by computerized tomography.
Torricelli FC; Marchini GS; Yamauchi FI; Danilovic A; Vicentini FC; Srougi M; Monga M; Mazzucchi E
J Urol; 2015 Jun; 193(6):2002-7. PubMed ID: 25524240
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Pelvicalyceal anatomy on the accessibility of reusable flexible ureteroscopy to lower pole calyx during retrograde intrarenal surgery.
Inoue T; Hamamoto S; Okada S; Imai S; Yamamichi F; Fujita M; Tominaga K; Fujisawa M
Int J Urol; 2023 Feb; 30(2):220-225. PubMed ID: 36305835
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Comparative follow-up of patients with acute and obtuse infundibulum-pelvic angle submitted to extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for lower caliceal stones: preliminary report and proposed study design.
Sampaio FJ; D'Anunciação AL; Silva EC
J Endourol; 1997 Jun; 11(3):157-61. PubMed ID: 9181441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for lower calyceal stones: can clearance be predicted?
Sabnis RB; Naik K; Patel SH; Desai MR; Bapat SD
Br J Urol; 1997 Dec; 80(6):853-7. PubMed ID: 9439396
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
