221 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33616709)
1. Comparing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy laser lithotripsy for treatment of urinary stones smaller than 2 cm: a cost-utility analysis in the Spanish clinical setting.
Romeu G; Marzullo-Zucchet LJ; Díaz J; Villarroya S; Budía A; Ordaz DG; Caballer V; Vivas D
World J Urol; 2021 Sep; 39(9):3593-3598. PubMed ID: 33616709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Economic outcomes of treatment for ureteral and renal stones: a systematic literature review.
Matlaga BR; Jansen JP; Meckley LM; Byrne TW; Lingeman JE
J Urol; 2012 Aug; 188(2):449-54. PubMed ID: 22698623
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Efficiency and cost of treating proximal ureteral stones: shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy plus holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser.
Parker BD; Frederick RW; Reilly TP; Lowry PS; Bird ET
Urology; 2004 Dec; 64(6):1102-6; discussion 1106. PubMed ID: 15596177
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Outcomes of Flexible Ureteroscopy vs Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Renal Stones in Pediatric Patients: A European Association of Urology Urolithiasis Guidelines Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Geraghty R; Lombardo R; Yuan C; Davis N; Tzelves L; Petrik A; Jung H; Gambaro G; Tailly T; Neisius A; Skolarikos A; Somani B
J Urol; 2023 Dec; 210(6):876-887. PubMed ID: 37669621
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Treatment of ureteral and renal stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.
Matlaga BR; Jansen JP; Meckley LM; Byrne TW; Lingeman JE
J Urol; 2012 Jul; 188(1):130-7. PubMed ID: 22591962
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Cost-effectiveness of treating ureteral stones in a Taipei City Hospital: shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy plus lithoclast.
Huang CY; Chen SS; Chen LK
Urol Int; 2009; 83(4):410-5. PubMed ID: 19996647
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison between extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and semirigid ureterorenoscope with holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy for treating large proximal ureteral stones.
Wu CF; Shee JJ; Lin WY; Lin CL; Chen CS
J Urol; 2004 Nov; 172(5 Pt 1):1899-902. PubMed ID: 15540749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Management of ureteral calculi: a cost comparison and decision making analysis.
Lotan Y; Gettman MT; Roehrborn CG; Cadeddu JA; Pearle MS
J Urol; 2002 Apr; 167(4):1621-9. PubMed ID: 11912376
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Treatment of proximal ureteral calculi: holmium:YAG laser ureterolithotripsy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.
Lam JS; Greene TD; Gupta M
J Urol; 2002 May; 167(5):1972-6. PubMed ID: 11956420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Initial experience in clinical application of thulium laser contact lithotripsy for transurethral treatment of urolithiasis].
Martov AG; Ergakov DV; Guseinov MA; Andronov AS; Dutov SV; Vinnichenko VA; Kovalenko AA
Urologiia; 2018 Mar; (1):112-120. PubMed ID: 29634144
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy for distal ureteral calculi: a prospective randomized study.
Peschel R; Janetschek G; Bartsch G
J Urol; 1999 Dec; 162(6):1909-12. PubMed ID: 10569535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Cost-effectiveness analysis of ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy and shock wave lithotripsy in the management of ureteral calculi in eastern China.
Zhang J; Shi Q; Wang GZ; Wang F; Jiang N
Urol Int; 2011; 86(4):470-5. PubMed ID: 21597268
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Retrograde ureteropyeloscopic treatment of 2 cm. or greater upper urinary tract and minor Staghorn calculi.
Grasso M; Conlin M; Bagley D
J Urol; 1998 Aug; 160(2):346-51. PubMed ID: 9679874
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Emergent versus delayed lithotripsy for obstructing ureteral stones: a cumulative analysis of comparative studies.
Arcaniolo D; De Sio M; Rassweiler J; Nicholas J; Lima E; Carrieri G; Liatsikos E; Mirone V; Monga M; Autorino R
Urolithiasis; 2017 Dec; 45(6):563-572. PubMed ID: 28233025
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparative analysis of direct and indirect costs of two minimally invasive techniques for the treatment of renal/ureteral calculi smaller than 2 cm.
Perez-Ardavin J; Lorenzo L; Caballer-Tarazona V; Budía-Alba A; Vivas-Consuelo D; Bahilo-Mateu P; Ordaz-Jurado G; Trassierra-Villa M; López-Acón JD; Boronat-Tormo F
Actas Urol Esp (Engl Ed); 2020 Sep; 44(7):505-511. PubMed ID: 32593640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A modified algorithm for the management of ureteral calculi: 100 consecutive cases.
Dretler SP; Weinstein A
J Urol; 1988 Oct; 140(4):732-6. PubMed ID: 3418792
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Pediatric ureteroscopic stone management.
Thomas JC; DeMarco RT; Donohoe JM; Adams MC; Brock JW; Pope JC
J Urol; 2005 Sep; 174(3):1072-4. PubMed ID: 16094060
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A prospective randomized study comparing shock wave lithotripsy and semirigid ureteroscopy for the management of proximal ureteral calculi.
Salem HK
Urology; 2009 Dec; 74(6):1216-21. PubMed ID: 19815264
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Shock wave lithotripsy or ureteroscopy for the management of proximal ureteral calculi: an old discussion revisited.
Kijvikai K; Haleblian GE; Preminger GM; de la Rosette J
J Urol; 2007 Oct; 178(4 Pt 1):1157-63. PubMed ID: 17698126
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Preoperative nomograms for predicting stone-free rate after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.
Kanao K; Nakashima J; Nakagawa K; Asakura H; Miyajima A; Oya M; Ohigashi T; Murai M
J Urol; 2006 Oct; 176(4 Pt 1):1453-6; discussion 1456-7. PubMed ID: 16952658
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
