Urology Annals
About UA | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | Online submissionLogin 
Urology Annals
  Editorial Board | Subscribe | Advertise | Contact
Users Online: 4752   Home Print this page  Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 10  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 287-290

Different managements of horseshoe kidney stones, any difference in the outcome?


1 Division of Pediatric Urology, Department of Urology, Prince Sultan Military Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
2 Division of Pediatric Urology, Department of Urology, Prince Sultan Military Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; Urology and Nephrology Center, Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Abdulhakim Al Otay
Department of Urology, Division of Pediatric Urology, Prince Sultan Military Medical City, Riyadh 11159
Saudi Arabia
Login to access the Email id


DOI: 10.4103/UA.UA_116_17

PMID: 30089987

Rights and Permissions

Purpose: The aim is to assess the outcomes of different approaches for the management of renal stones associated with horseshoe kidneys (HSKs) in our institution over a 12-year period. Methods: A retrospective review of 144 patients with HSKs who presented from 2000 to 2012 was performed. Twenty-eight patients (19.4%) were found to have renal stones. Demographic data were collected; the method of treatment and the outcomes of stone management were reviewed. We excluded patients with non-functioning moieties and associated genitourinary anomalies, and those with incomplete data. Results: We included 25 patients, of which 16 males (64%) and 9 females (36%), with a mean age of 37 years. Mean serum creatinine level was 66 mmol/L. Eleven patients with a stone size <8 mm were treated expectantly with medical treatment, with only one patient requiring endoscopic intervention. Six patients (24%) with a stone size between 1 cm and ≤2 cm were treated with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) with the placement of double J stents, and seven patients (28%) with a stone size of >2 cm were treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy. One patient with a 10 mm stone was treated using flexible ureteroscopy. No significant perioperative complications were encountered. Conclusions: Indications, methods of treatment, and outcomes of management of stones associated with HSKs were comparable to those for stones associated with normal kidneys. Tailored approach based on stone size is highly recommended. ESWL accompanied with ureteric stenting is a promising strategy for the management of stones associated with HSKs in selected patients requiring intervention.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1528    
    Printed27    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded206    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal