Suppr超能文献

输尿管镜检查治疗尿路结石后的支架定位:问题仍未解决。

Stent positioning after ureteroscopy for urinary calculi: the question is still open.

作者信息

Damiano Rocco, Autorino Riccardo, Esposito Ciro, Cantiello Francesco, Sacco Rosario, de Sio Marco, D'Armiento Massimo

机构信息

Cattedra di Urologia, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, Via T. Campanella, 88100, Italy.

出版信息

Eur Urol. 2004 Sep;46(3):381-7; discussion 387-8. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2004.04.004.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a study to assess the need for routine ureteral stenting after ureteroscopic stone removal using Lithoclast pneumatic intracorporeal lithotripsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 104 patients, prospectively divided in two groups to receive (group A, 52 patients) or not (group B, 52 patients) a stent after stone removal, underwent ureteroscopy for the treatment of ureteral lithiasis. The procedure was performed with the patient under either general or epidural anesthesia. A semirigid ureteroscope (Wolf 8.9 Fr) was used in all cases and intracorporeal lithotripsy with ballistic energy was performed. In group A a double pigtail ureteral 4.8 or 6 Fr polyurethane stent was placed following ureteroscopy. All patients were closely evaluated on follow-up examinations. The outcomes measured were postoperative patient pain, lower urinary tract symptoms, the need for hospital care as a result of the postoperative pain and late postoperative complications.

RESULTS

The two patient groups were comparable with respect to the baseline variables of patient gender and age, stone location and mean stone size. Mean operative time plus or minus standard deviation (S.D.) in group A was 42 +/- 15 minutes (range 20-65) compared to 37 +/- 20 (range 15-60) in group B. Operative time was not significantly longer when a stent was placed (p = 0.17). At day 3 the mean visual analog pain score in group B was much higher than in group A (p = 0.01). Dysuria, hematuria and frequency/urgency were more prevalent in the stented group, although without statistically significant difference. Readmission to the hospital for unremitting pain was necessary in 12 of 104 patients (11.5%) all being in unstented group (p < 0.05). The incidence of anatomical ureteral narrowing on IVP at 6 months follow-up was not statistically different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, using Swiss Lithoclast ballistic energy to fragment stones, routine stent placement is advisable also after uncomplicated ureteroscopic lithotripsy without ureteral dilation. Further prospective randomized studies are needed to assess the role of stenting after ureteroscopic lithotripsy, considering different energies sources, scopes, diameter and site of the stones in the ureter.

摘要

目的

我们开展了一项研究,以评估在使用碎石钳气压式体内碎石术进行输尿管镜下结石清除术后常规放置输尿管支架的必要性。

材料与方法

共有104例患者,前瞻性地分为两组,一组(A组,52例患者)在结石清除术后放置支架,另一组(B组,52例患者)不放置支架,接受输尿管镜检查以治疗输尿管结石。手术在全身麻醉或硬膜外麻醉下进行。所有病例均使用半硬性输尿管镜(Wolf 8.9 Fr),并采用弹道能量进行体内碎石。A组在输尿管镜检查后放置一根4.8或6 Fr的双猪尾聚氨酯输尿管支架。所有患者在随访检查中均接受密切评估。所测量的结果包括术后患者疼痛、下尿路症状、因术后疼痛而需要住院治疗的情况以及术后晚期并发症。

结果

两组患者在性别、年龄、结石位置和平均结石大小等基线变量方面具有可比性。A组的平均手术时间(±标准差)为42±15分钟(范围20 - 65分钟),而B组为37±20分钟(范围15 - 60分钟)。放置支架时手术时间并未显著延长(p = 0.17)。在第3天,B组的平均视觉模拟疼痛评分远高于A组(p = 0.01)。排尿困难、血尿以及尿频/尿急在放置支架组更为常见,尽管无统计学显著差异。104例患者中有12例(11.5%)因持续疼痛需再次入院,均在未放置支架组(p < 0.05)。随访6个月时,两组在静脉肾盂造影(IVP)上输尿管解剖性狭窄的发生率无统计学差异。

结论

根据我们的经验,使用瑞士碎石钳弹道能量碎石时,即使在未进行输尿管扩张的简单输尿管镜碎石术后,常规放置支架也是可取的。考虑到不同的能量来源、镜体、结石在输尿管中的直径和位置,需要进一步开展前瞻性随机研究以评估输尿管镜碎石术后放置支架的作用。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验