These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
5. A new nomogram for prediction of outcome of pediatric shock-wave lithotripsy. Dogan HS; Altan M; Citamak B; Bozaci AC; Karabulut E; Tekgul S J Pediatr Urol; 2015 Apr; 11(2):84.e1-6. PubMed ID: 25812469 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [What is the current status of shock wave lithotripsy?]. Neisius A Urologe A; 2017 Sep; 56(9):1147-1157. PubMed ID: 28766005 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Shock wave lithotripsy: advances in technology and technique. Lingeman JE; McAteer JA; Gnessin E; Evan AP Nat Rev Urol; 2009 Dec; 6(12):660-70. PubMed ID: 19956196 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Optimizing shock wave lithotripsy in the 21st century. Argyropoulos AN; Tolley DA Eur Urol; 2007 Aug; 52(2):344-52. PubMed ID: 17499914 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Optimal frequency of shock wave lithotripsy in urolithiasis treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Li K; Lin T; Zhang C; Fan X; Xu K; Bi L; Han J; Huang H; Liu H; Dong W; Duan Y; Yu M; Huang J J Urol; 2013 Oct; 190(4):1260-7. PubMed ID: 23538240 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [New strategies and protocols in SWL.]. Budía Alba A; Bahilo Mateu P; Ordaz Jurado G; López-Acón JD; Trassierra Villa M; Boronat Tormo F Arch Esp Urol; 2017 Jan; 70(1):113-123. PubMed ID: 28221146 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Technological innovations in shock wave lithotripsy. Mosquera Seoane L; Ortiz Salvador JB; Budia Alba A; Perez Fentes DA Actas Urol Esp (Engl Ed); 2024; 48(1):105-110. PubMed ID: 37858618 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Is shock wave lithotripsy efficient for the elderly stone formers? Results of a matched-pair analysis. Philippou P; Lamrani D; Moraitis K; Bach C; Masood J; Buchholz N Urol Res; 2012 Aug; 40(4):299-304. PubMed ID: 21901557 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. How do stone attenuation and skin-to-stone distance in computed tomography influence the performance of shock wave lithotripsy in ureteral stone disease? Müllhaupt G; Engeler DS; Schmid HP; Abt D BMC Urol; 2015 Jul; 15():72. PubMed ID: 26201514 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of High, Intermediate, and Low Frequency Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Urinary Tract Stone Disease: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis. Kang DH; Cho KS; Ham WS; Lee H; Kwon JK; Choi YD; Lee JY PLoS One; 2016; 11(7):e0158661. PubMed ID: 27387279 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. How can and should we optimize extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy? Chaussy CG; Tiselius HG Urolithiasis; 2018 Feb; 46(1):3-17. PubMed ID: 29177561 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Predictive factors and management of steinstrasse after shock wave lithotripsy in pediatric urolithiasis--a multivariate analysis study. Onal B; Citgez S; Tansu N; Demirdag C; Dogan C; Gonul B; Demirkesen O; Obek C; Erozenci A Urology; 2012 Nov; 80(5):1127-31. PubMed ID: 22999455 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Effect of modification of shock-wave delivery on stone fragmentation. Talic RF; Rabah DM Curr Opin Urol; 2006 Mar; 16(2):83-7. PubMed ID: 16479209 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]