BACKGROUND: Staghorn calculi (SC) occupy the renal pelvis and calyces and are common in females linked to repeated urinary tract infections (UTIs). Judicious surgery planning reduces the chance of further damage to the kidney due to renal SCs. Open stone surgery (OSS) is one of the various operative techniques to remove such huge stones with one operative intervention and protect the kidney from ongoing functional damage.
METHODS: A 47-year-old male patient presented with right-sided renal colic pain, and on further investigations, he was diagnosed with a large renal stone responsible for substantial renal function impairment on the same side. The SC measured 8 × 4 cm with another stone in the lower calyx. thinner parenchyma, and only 16% relative function. Therefore, open surgery was selected over less invasive approaches because multiple lithotripsy (ESWL) sittings may have been required in less invasive options.
CONCLUSIONS: SCs, which can be complete or partial, often result in renal impairment. Hence, it is crucial to implement a proactive therapeutic approach that includes a thorough evaluation of the stone\'s size and position, the patient\'s choice, and institutional capacity. Complete elimination of SCs is preferred to maintain maximal renal function. Based on clinical, technical, and socioeconomic considerations, open pyelolithotomy or OSS was chosen over percutaneous nephrolithotomy for SC removal in the discussed case.
CONCLUSIONS: The ability to remove large stones in a single intervention with open pyelolithotomy has been very effective due to its distinctive clinical presentation and pathological abnormalities.

Endoscopic therapy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) are recommended as the first choice in treating pancreatolithiasis. Endoscopic therapy is generally performed using endoscopic pancreatic sphincterotomy (EPST). Herein, we report our experience implementing a treatment protocol, combining endoscopic therapy and ESWL without EPST, for pancreatolithiasis. The inpatient treatment plan was performed every 3 months with a set number of sessions of ESWL with endoscopic pancreatic stenting (EPS) implanted or replaced. Finally, treatment was terminated when the stone was removed after implantation of a 10-Fr stent and crushed to approximately 3 mm or after spontaneous stone discharge. Eight patients were included in this study; the median time to stone disappearance was 208.5 days. The median number of inpatient treatment cycles, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and ESWL sessions was 2.5, 3, and 3, respectively. No serious adverse events were observed in all patients. Therefore, combining ESWL and EPS without EPST can safely treat pancreatolithiasis.

Whether pancreatic extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is safe for patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is unclear. A woman in her early 30s was admitted to our hospital because of intermittent upper abdominal pain and recurrent pancreatitis. The imaging results confirmed the diagnosis of pancreatic stones and ADPKD. We performed pancreatic ESWL using a third-generation lithotripter to pulverize the pancreatic stones. A maximum of 5000 shock waves was delivered per therapeutic session. A second session of ESWL was performed the next day. The patient developed no adverse events or complications related to pancreatic ESWL. Three years after treatment, the patient had developed no relapse of pancreatitis or abdominal pain. Shock waves do not lead to complications such as hematuria, cyst rupture, or deterioration of the inner bleeding of renal cysts. Multiple kidney cysts are not a contraindication for pancreatic ESWL.

BACKGROUND: Despite pancreatic extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (P-ESWL) is a minimally invasive treatment for pancreatic stones, complications exist.
METHODS: A 37-year-old male was diagnosed with chronic pancreatitis and admitted to our hospital for recurrent acute pancreatitis. After the first P-ESWL session, the patient complained of a new type of pain different from the previous pain pattern. Computerized tomography and colonoscopy were arranged and colonic hematoma was found. Since the patient had stable vital signs, no special treatment was given focusing on the colonic hematoma. Five days later, P-ESWL treatment was repeatedly performed for four consecutive days. Two days after the last P-ESWL session, the patient underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. At the three-month follow up visit, the colonic hematoma disappeared and pancreatic stones decreased significantly.
CONCLUSIONS: To the best of our knowledge, colonic hematoma after P-ESWL for pancreatic stones has never been reported. Here, we present the only case of colonic hematoma after P-ESWL, which was coincidentally found in more than 6000 P-ESWL sessions in our hospital. As the symptoms of colonic hematoma are mild, we believe the incidence of colonic hematoma has been underestimated. Many people with colonic hematoma after P-ESWL may be undiagnosed or misdiagnosed. Treatment for colonic hematoma depends on whether there is severe clinical state. Exploration of more precise location method for pancreatic stones may reduce the probability of P-ESWL complication.

OBJECTIVE: Urolithiasis is a common medical condition affecting the urinary tract. Typical symptoms reported by patients include colic pain and hematuria. Some patients may undergo surgical intervention or lithotripsy to remove the stones. In this case, we demonstrated that Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) was an effective modality to remove stones in a patient with urolithiasis.
UNASSIGNED: A 47-year-old man suffered from right flank pain and hematuria for three months and was diagnosed with an upper third ureteral stone obstruction with right hydronephrosis. He had received extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) three times before his first CHM visit, but it was unsuccessful. Therefore, he sought CHM for further intervention. His symptoms subsided, and the image study showed complete removal of the ureteral stone after regular therapy with Zhi Bai Di Huang Wan () combined with Lygodii spora (), Curcumae radix (), Endothelium Corneum Gigeriae Galli (), Lysimachiae herba (), Orthosiphon stamineus () for approximately four months. Neither complications nor side-effects were noted during the CHM treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: In this case, we concluded that CHM may be an effective alternative therapy for the treatment of ureteral stones, and furthermore, may also be applied as an option to salvage failed ESWL procedures.

Uric acid stone is the most comment radiolucent renal stone with high recurrence rate, which would further cause acute upper urinary tract obstruction and kidney failure. Here we report two cases of renal uric acid stone from December 2012 to April 2013. One 43-year-old male patient suffered from chronic uric acid nephrolithiasis caused by the long-term indwelling of bilateral double-J stent. Another 69-year-old patient was also diagnosed with uric acid nephrolithiasis at the right kidney. Both patients were first treated with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), followed by 1.5% sodium bicarbonate dissolution therapy. After a week of the treatment, the uric acid stones in both patients were completely dissolved without retrograde infection. In summary, the use of ESWL and sodium bicarbonate dissolution therapy as a combined modality is a safe, effective, inexpensive treatment for uric acid nephrolithiasis.

Shock wave lithotripsy may unmask epitopes within the glomerular basement membrane, leading to the formation of anti-glomerular basement membrane (GBM) antibodies and clinical disease in susceptible individuals. Although rare, our case highlights the need for vigilant monitoring of renal function following extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. This may allow for early recognition, treatment and improved outcome of anti-GBM disease.

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) is considered the standard of care for the treatment of small upper ureteric and renal calculi. A few centers have extended its use to the treatment of bile duct calculi and pancreatic calculi. The complication rates with SWL are low, resulting in its wide spread acceptance and usage. However, some of the serious complications reported in 1% of patients include acute pancreatitis, perirenal hematoma, urosepsis, venous thrombosis, biliary obstruction, bowel perforation, lung injury, rupture of aortic aneurysm and intracranial hemorrhage. To our knowledge, only six cases of acute pancreatitis or necrotizing pancreatitis following SWL have been documented in the literature. Herein, we report a rare case of acute pancreatitis and formation of a pseudo cyst following SWL for left renal pelvic calculus.