Skip to content

Comparison of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy Versus Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery in the Management of Renal Calculi

Comparison of Outcomes of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy Versus Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery in the Management of Renal Calculi Measuring 1 to 2 Centimeters

Status
Recruiting
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT07261995
Enrollment
98
Registered
2025-12-03
Start date
2025-09-05
Completion date
2026-02-05
Last updated
2025-12-03

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Nephrolithiasis, Renal Calculi

Keywords

Kidney stones, Nephrolithiasis, Urolithiasis, Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, Retrograde intrarenal surgery

Brief summary

This study is being carried out in patients with kidney stones measuring between 1 and 2 centimeters. Kidney stones are common in Pakistan and can cause severe pain, infection, and repeated hospital visits. Two commonly used treatments for stones of this size are extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). ESWL uses shock waves applied from outside the body to break the stone into small fragments that can pass in the urine. RIRS is a minimally invasive endoscopic procedure in which a thin flexible scope is passed through the urinary passage into the kidney and a laser is used to break the stone. Adult patients aged 18 to 65 years with a single kidney stone of 1-2 cm will be included. According to the urologist's clinical judgment and patient preference, individuals will undergo either ESWL (Group A) as a day-care shock wave procedure or RIRS (Group B) under general anesthesia using a laser. All patients will receive standard care before and after the procedure and will be followed for 28 days. The study will compare how completely the stone is cleared (based on a CT scan), how long patients stay in hospital, how much pain they feel after the procedure, and whether they develop visible blood in the urine or signs of infection such as fever and raised white cell count. The need for any further procedure for the same stone will also be recorded. The central hypothesis is that there is a meaningful difference between ESWL and RIRS in stone clearance, safety, pain, and need for retreatment. The findings are expected to help doctors and patients choose the most suitable treatment for kidney stones of this size in routine practice.

Interventions

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy delivered as an outpatient procedure under sedation, using a standard lithotripter. Shock waves are applied at 60-100 impulses per minute, up to a maximum of 3000 shocks per session, to fragment a 1-2 centimeter renal calculus. Patients receive standard analgesia, hydration counselling, and antibiotic prophylaxis according to hospital protocol.

Retrograde intrarenal surgery performed under general anesthesia after prior placement of a 5 Fr double-J ureteral stent. A flexible ureteroscope introduced via the urethra and ureteral access sheath is used to visualise the renal stone. Stone disintegration is achieved with a Holmium:YAG laser (0.5-1.2 Joules, 20-40 Hertz) using dusting or fragmentation, followed by placement of a double-J stent for three weeks. Standard postoperative analgesia, antibiotics, and hydration advice are given.

Sponsors

Ziauddin Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Patients aged between 18 and 65 years. * Patients diagnosed with a single renal calculus measuring between 1 cm and 2 cm, confirmed on imaging (ultrasound or non-contrast CT KUB).

Exclusion criteria

* Presence of multiple renal stones or bilateral renal stones. * Patients with anatomical abnormalities such as horseshoe kidney, ureteropelvic junction obstruction, or calyceal diverticulum based on medical history or radiological findings. * Active urinary tract infection at the time of intervention. * Pregnant women. * Patients with bleeding disorders or on anticoagulation therapy that cannot be safely stopped. * Patients with chronic kidney disease (eGFR \< 30 mL/min/1.73 m²). * Patients with morbid obesity (BMI \> 40 kg/m²). * Patients with solitary kidney.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Stone clearance rate28 days after the procedureProportion of participants in each treatment group who achieve successful stone clearance, defined as absence of visible stone or presence of a clinically insignificant residual fragment measuring ≤4 mm on non-contrast computed tomography of kidneys, ureters and bladder (CT-KUB). All scans will be interpreted and reported by a consultant radiologist blinded to treatment allocation. Stone clearance will be analysed as a binary variable (cleared/not cleared) for comparison between extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and retrograde intrarenal surgery.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Postoperative pain intensity (VAS score)At 24 hours after the procedurePatient-reported pain severity measured on a 10-cm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), where 0 represents no pain and 10 represents worst imaginable pain. Scores will be recorded by trained nursing staff and compared between groups as a continuous variable.

Countries

Pakistan

Contacts

Primary ContactMuhammad Waqas Arshad Arshad
waqasarshad617@gmail.com+9221358629379

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026