Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
April 1, 1996The Journal of Urology

Clinical Implications of Clinically Insignificant Stone Fragments After Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Authors

SSSteven B. StreemCleveland ClinicAYAgnes YostCleveland ClinicEMEdward J. MaschaCardiac Surgery

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Cite This Study

Streem et al. (1996) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a6b0d08050bc01bbbcb53b9https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(01)66208-6
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Effect of Medical Management and Residual Fragments on Recurrent Stone Formation Following Shock Wave Lithotripsy1995 · 179 citations
  2. 2<b>Long‐term Stone Regrowth and Recurrence Rates after Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy</b>1993 · 48 citations
  3. 3First and Second Generation Lithotripsy in Children: Results, Comparison and Followup1995 · 70 citations
  4. 4First UK Consensus Conference on Lithotriptor Terminology–19891991 · 33 citations
  5. 5Lithostar Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy: The First 1,000 Patients1992 · 65 citations