The outcomes of extracorporeal shock wave compared to ureteroscopic lithotripsy for the treatment of ureteral stones: A Comprehensive Systematic Review

Abstract

Background: This study aims to provide the outcomes of the extracorporeal shock wave compared to ureteroscopic lithotripsy for the treatment of ureteral stones. Methods: Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, this systematic review focused exclusively on full-text articles published in English between 2014 and 2024. Result: The study conducted a comprehensive review of over 100 publications sourced from reputable databases, including ScienceDirect, SagePub, and PubMed. Following an initial screening, seven publications were identified as warranting more in-depth analysis. Conclusion: For the treatment of ureteral stones, ESWL and URS lithotripsy operations are necessary, despite the fact that URS procedures had a greater perforation rate and larger stones than ESWL procedures. Overall, URS had higher stone-free rates than the ESWL lithotripsy technique. Nonetheless, there was no discernible difference between the two methods in terms of stone clearing failure, operating time, AUP, or problems related to hematuria.