Clinical Trials Logo

Stone, Urinary clinical trials

View clinical trials related to Stone, Urinary.

Filter by:
  • None
  • Page 1

NCT ID: NCT05759767 Active, not recruiting - Pediatric Disorder Clinical Trials

The Efficacy and Safety of Medical Expulsive Therapy After Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) in Pediatric Urolithiasis

Start date: February 1, 2021
Phase: N/A
Study type: Interventional

The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of MET after ESWL in pediatric urolithiasis.

NCT ID: NCT05570084 Recruiting - Stone, Urinary Clinical Trials

Silodosin vs Tamsulosin as MET

Start date: May 31, 2022
Phase: Phase 3
Study type: Interventional

The spontaneous passage rate for ureteral stone less than 1cm causing acute ureteral obstruction is about 50%. Previous Cochrane review has concluded that alpha blocker is likely to increase stone passage rate, reduce time to stone passage, analgesic use and hospitalisations. The European Association of Urology Guideline also recommends giving alpha blockers as Medical Expulsive Therapy to patients with distal ureteric stones >5mm. However there is heterogeneity in different alpha blockers. Silodosin is a recently introduced selective alpha blocker which has a much higher selectivity for the alpha-1-A receptor (17-fold compared with tamsulosin). From previous animal studies, ureteral contraction is mainly mediated by the alpha-1-A receptor, hence silodosin maybe more effective in increasing stone passage compared with tamsulosin. Previous studies and meta-analysis has shown superiority of silodosin over tamsulosin on earlier stone passage and less pain. However, there is no data on Chinese population. The investigators would like to compare the efficacy and side effect profile of Silodosin versus tamsulosin on improving stone passage rate and hence reduce rate of further intervention for stone clearance.

NCT ID: NCT04605315 Completed - Pediatric ALL Clinical Trials

Indications and Outcomes in Kidney-ureteral Pediatric Lithiasis: Experience of Parma

Start date: July 1, 2019
Phase:
Study type: Observational

Incidence of paediatric urolithiasis is increasing in Europe and North America. Nowadays the management of stone disease is a common practice in not endemic country. The surgical's treatment is based on similar techniques as for adults. In the last years due to miniaturization of endoscopic instruments endourology has become the best approach to treat urinary stones in children. The investigators have retrospectively reviewed experience from 01/01/2000 to 28/02/2019 in children ≤ 16 years old affected by urinary stones who underwent rigid and flexible ureterorenoscopy and pecutaneous nephrolitotripsy procedures and recorded clinical data, overall success rate and complication.

NCT ID: NCT04594161 Completed - Kidney Diseases Clinical Trials

Effectiveness of Drainage by PCN vs. JJ in Patients With Symptoms of Obstructive Kidney Disease Caused by Urolithiasis

STONE
Start date: July 15, 2020
Phase: N/A
Study type: Interventional

To investigate the effectiveness of percutaneous nephrostomy catheter placement versus retrograde double J catheter placement in patients with symptoms of obstructive kidney disease (with either infection and/or pain and/or kidney function deterioration) caused by urolithiasis.

NCT ID: NCT03388060 Completed - Urologic Diseases Clinical Trials

(SWL) Versus (ODT) Versus Combined SWL And ODT For Radiolucent Stone

Start date: April 1, 2017
Phase: N/A
Study type: Interventional

compare the efficacy of of ultrasound guided SWL versus dissolution therapy versus combined SWL and dissolution therapy in management of 1 - 2.5 cm renal stones.

NCT ID: NCT03243682 Active, not recruiting - Urologic Diseases Clinical Trials

The Alternating Bidirectional Versus The Standard Approach During Shock Wave Lithotripsy For Renal And Upper Lumbar Ureteric Stones

Start date: September 1, 2016
Phase: N/A
Study type: Interventional

compare the outcomes of SWL for renal and upper lumbar ureteric stones using the alternating bidirectional approach versus the standard approach.