Table 3.
Study | Study design | Lithotripsy | No. of patients | Clearance, % | Clearance after 1 session, % | Mean no. of procedure | Mean size of stone, mm |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Kurihara et al. (2016) [30] | Multicenter Prospective |
EHL + LL | 31 | 74.2 | 1.9 | 20.6 | |
Bhandari et al. (2016) [19] | Single center | LL | 34 | 100 | 94.1 | 1.1 | |
Navaneethan et al. (2016) [31] | Multicenter Retrospective |
LL | 31 | 97.2 | 86.1 | 1.1 | 14.9 |
Wong et al. (2017) [26] | Single center | EHL + LL | 17 | 100 | 94.1 | 17 | |
Brewer et al. (2018) [27] | Multicenter Retrospective |
EHL + LL | 407 | 97.3 | 77.4 | 1 | |
Buxbaum at al. (2018) [37] | Single center Prospective |
LL | 42 | 93 | 1.9 | 18 | |
Turowski et al. (2018) [32] | Multicenter Retrospective |
EHL + LL | 107 | 91.1 | 3 | ||
Angsuwatcharakon et al. (2019) [33] | Multicenter Prospective |
LL | 32 | 100 | 100 | 1 | 19.5 |
Bokemeyer et al. (2020) [29] | Multicenter Retrospective |
EHL + LL | 60 | 95 | 67 | 20 |
EHL, electrohydraulic lithotripsy; LL, laser lithotripsy.