| Title |
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stones
|
|---|---|
| Published by |
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, October 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd007044.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Srisubat, Attasit, Potisat, Somkiat, Lojanapiwat, Bannakij, Setthawong, Vasun, Laopaiboon, Malinee |
| Abstract |
Stones in the urinary tract are a common medical problem in the general population. At present, the great expansion in minimally invasive techniques has led to the decrease in open surgery. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) has been introduced as an alternative approach which disintegrates stones in the kidney and upper urinary tract through the use of shock waves. Nevertheless, as there are limitations with the success rate in ESWL, other minimally invasive modalities for kidney stones such as percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) are also widely applied. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Russia | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | 2% |
| Pakistan | 1 | 1% |
| Ireland | 1 | 1% |
| Egypt | 1 | 1% |
| Nigeria | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 85 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 17 | 18% |
| Other | 15 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 21 | 23% |
| Unknown | 18 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 53 | 58% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 4% |
| Unknown | 22 | 24% |