Suppr超能文献

Extraperitoneal versus transperitoneal approach of laparoscopic ureterolithotomy in selected patients.

作者信息

Kongchareonsombat Wisoot, Atichoksakun Sahachart, Kitvikai Kittinut, Patcharatrakul Suthep, Chaimuengraj Suchart

机构信息

Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.

出版信息

J Med Assoc Thai. 2010 Jul;93(7):794-8.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate laparoscopic ureterolithotomy between extraperitoneal and intraperitoneal approach in patients with failure for Extracoporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and endoscopic procedure of stone removal.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

A retrospective review was performed in 39 patients (40 stone units) underwent laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (extraperitoneal or intraperitoneal approach) in Ramathibodi Hospital between July 1997 and December 2007. The patients who had a large, impacted ureteric stone more than 1.5 cm or after failure of ESWL and endoscopic procedure were included. The data was collected and compared in operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), duration of retaining drain (days) and complications.

RESULTS

The EBL, operative time and duration of retaining drain were 100 cc, 125.8 minutes and 3 days in the extraperitoneal group and 51 cc, 128 minutes and 5.8 days in the intraperitoneal group, respectively. The duration of retaining drain in the transperitoneal group was significant longer than the extraperitoneal group (p = 0.002). The EBL, operative time and complication were not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

There does not seem to be a clear advantage to using a transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal approach for laparoscopic ureterolithotomy, depending on physician preference.

摘要

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验