These are educational slides from my lectures. i have videos of some recent lectures on my youtube channel: https://youtube.com/user/leichangmoh
李長茂Dr Clarence Lei Chang Moh
- Clarence Lei ChangMoh
- Dr Clarence Lei Chang Moh, FRCS Urol (MMC No.: 024209, NSR 123533) Adjunct Professor, Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, Honorary Consultant SGH, Heart Centre Sarawak, Hospital KL; Consultant Urologist(Adult and Paediatric), Kidney, Urology, Stone, Prostate & Transplant) Normah Hospital, Petra Jaya, 93050 Kuching, MALAYSIA Tel: +6082-440055 e-mail: clarencelei@gmail.com telemedicine welcome; email or whatsapp+60128199880; standard charges RM235 for first & RM105 subsequent
Monday, January 25, 2016
Thursday, December 3, 2015
Most Urinary stones can be treated with shockwave!
Plenary Lecture at 24 Malaysian Urological Conference, Johor Baru, 21 November 2015
The "Perfect" ESWL
by Dr Clarence
C M Lei
Kidney &
Urology Centre, Normah Hospital, Kuching, Malaysia
Introduction:
Urinary stone
management comprises at least a third of urology practice. The classical
presentation is a loin to groin acute colic in a young (30 to 60 years old)
man. Prevalence is about 5 to 15%. Microhaematuria
is a useful clue to diagnosis. Imaging
to confirm the stone is often possible with clinic ultrasound and plain
x-ray. Nevertheless, the gold standard
investigation is a non-contrast low dose CT urography.
Methods:
ESWL,
extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy is the greatest advance in modern urology.
It was first reported by Chaussy C et al in the Journal of Urology, 1982; 127:
417. The author has been using ESWL since
1989. His personal experience with
lithotripters include Siemens (GHKL, 1991 – 1995), Edap (1996 – 1997) and the
Dornier Compact (since 1998). Early
experience in GHKL recorded about 2000 cases of ESWL per annum. In more recent years, the number of cases
done is about 200 per annum.
Results:
Selection of
the appropriate patient and stone is the most important factor for a successful
ESWL. If the patient has an obvious urinary tract infection, this
should be treated. Parenteral antibiotics should be given during ESWL in such
cases. More than 50% of the stones would
be suitable for ESWL: more than 6 mm in size, but with a maximum diameter of <
20 mm. Upper urinary tract stones
(except for the lower pole) are ideally suitable, whereas lower urinary tract
stones can be treated endoscopically with a success rate of almost 100%. The few contraindications for ESWL include: pregnancy,
gross obesity, uncorrected coagulopathy, nearby vascular calcifications and a non-functioning
kidney. Informed consent is should be obtained. The patient should be aware that the overall stone free rate is
about 80%. I would also not persist if there is little fragmentation after 3
sessions, usually given every other day.
The alternative options with its complications and success rates should
also be made known to the patient during the informed consent process. The patient should also be informed of the
complications of ESWL, viz bleeding (1 in 178 patients with significant
perinephric haematoma in the author’s series), obstruction by the stone
fragments, with up to 5% of patients requiring urgent ureteric stenting
especially if there is fever.
The following
technical points deserve attention during the ESWL: air pockets trapped in the
coupling gel between the shockhead and the patient significantly reduced the
delivery of shockwave energy. Delivery of the shockwave at 60/min versus 90/min
results in a stone free rate at 3 months of 91 versus 80% respectively. There
should be adequate analgesia: pre-medication with analgesics, anaesthetic cream
and intravenous analgesia during ESWL. With sufficient analgesia, ESWL can be
delivered with maximal power and number of shocks. Accurate localisation of the stone with x-ray
or ultrasound is important and this must be continuously monitored, say, every
200 shocks. The patient should have
follow-up documentation to show that the patient is stone free or has stable
stone fragments.
ESWL treatment
should be part of holistic management: e.g. co-existing diabetes, hypertension
and chronic kidney disease. All the
lithotripsy medical staff should be credentialed in ESWL. Stone Clinic staff should know about stone
management, treatment of complications, other treatment options and the
prevention of further stone episodes. The most important prevention is the
adequate intake of fluid such that the patient produces 2 to 3 litres of urine
per day. Serum calcium, uric acid and urine culture should be reviewed in all
patients.
Conclusion:
ESWL remains a
mainstay treatment for urinary stones.
The treatment of most upper urinary tract stones less than 20 mm is
rewarding. Selection of stone size,
localisation, ESWL techniques, follow-up and stone prevention are important. Stone treatment should be given as part of the
holistic management of patient.
Friday, November 28, 2014
Vietnam Urology
I was
invited by Dr Vu Le Chuyen (Urology Chief, of General Plan Binh Dan Hospital,
Ho Chi Minh City) of Vietnam Urology & Nephrology Association to lecture at
their Annual Scientific Meeting held at the beach town of Quang Binh on 8 August 2014. There are no direct flights, even from Kuala
Lumpur and the journey took a day! The
tour guide told us that “Vietnam is a poor country” but I am impressed by the
country: friendly, metered taxis, clean toilets, clean environment and
relatively cheap food. Vietnam has more urologists (~ 800 to population of 90
million) compared to Malaysia (80 to 30
million). However, English is not widely spoken. I had lunch and dinner with Dr Rainy Umbas
(Director of Asian School of Urology) and about 10 Indonesian urologists: they
speak good English and knows exactly about the urology practices in
Malaysia! Rightly, as we move into ASEAN
free trade in 2015!! I attach my edited
lecture slides on pyeloplasty, group photo with some ASEAN urologists, dinner
with Indonesian urologists
Urinary stones and kidney failure: treat both aggressively!
STONES IN AN ESTABLISHED
CKD, DO WE PROCEED?
Dr Clarence Lei Chang
Moh,
Consultant Urologist,
Kidney & Stone Centre, Normah Hospital, Kuching.
CKD,
chronic kidney disease, is diagnosed when there is kidney disease for more than
3 months, structural or biochemical.
There are 5 stages of CKD, with Stage 5 as creatinine clearance less
than 15 mls/min. A patient is likely to
have CKD rather than acute kidney disease if he has risk factors of diabetes, hypertension,
increased age, low haemoglobin, low calcium, high phosphate, high PTH. Ultrasound show echogenic and smaller kidneys
unless the patient has diabetes or lymphoproliferative disease.
Obstructive
uropathy can be readily relieved by percutaneous nephrostomy or ureteric
stenting, rather than dialysis. Other
indications for stone treatment in CKD include pain from obstruction and
infection. Even patients who need
chronic dialysis should undergo stone treatment to maintain urine output such
that the patient can enjoy fluid for some months.
Radiolucent
uric acid stones can be treated by chemodissolution, once the obstruction has
been relieved by ureteric stenting. The side with the “easier” stone can be
treated first to allow some recovery of renal function. Otherwise, the kidney with the better function
(good renal size, cortex with less echogenicity) can then be operated. Upper urinary tract stones less than 2 cm can
be readily treated by ESWL, extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy.
Stone
free rates after treatment are reduced in patients with CKD. This may partly be related to the lower urine
volume in patients with CKD. In one
study of ESWL for proximal ureteric stones, the stone free rate was 50% when
the GFR was less than 60 as compared to 93% when the GFR was more than 60. Therefore, the urologist must be inclined to
do more axillary procedures when treating patients with CKD.
Patients
who have nephrectomy for stones are more likely to develop CKD as compared to
patients who had kidneys preserved. In
the Sarawak General Hospital, 36% of 71 nephrectomies over 32 months were done
for stones with infection (reported in MUC 2012). Uric acid and struvite stones have worse CKD
compared to calcium stones (eGFR 55 vs 72).
Hence, stone analysis is important to stratify risk. Urinary stones per se has a 2 times increased
risk of CKD (1% vs 0.5%) even after adjustment for confounders (e.g. age,
diabetes, hypertension), even after successful ESWL, and even after a single
stone episode. The basis may be genetic whereby
a defect contributes to CKD and stone
formation. Therefore, stone formers
should only donate their kidneys after due consideration.
Managing
patients with CKD is teamwork with the nephrologists, nurses, dietitians and
the family. Stones presenting with renal
impairment may require urgent treatment e.g. haemodialysis for fluid overload,
hyperkalaemia or restlessness due to severe uraemia. Management of stone & CKD
includes management of underlying diabetes, hypertension, anaemia, gout and
bone disease. According to the Malaysian National Renal Registry data (www.msn.org.my) 1-2 % (data 1993-2013) of
renal failure in Malaysian is due to urinary stones whereas it is 0.2% in the
US Renal Data System in 2011.
CONCLUSION: Every effort
must be made to treat urinary stones especially in CKD. Axillary procedures
e.g. ureteric stenting and aggressive medical measures should be implemented in
treating stones with CKD.
Lecture given at Malaysian Urological Conference 2014
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)































































