Suppr超能文献

脊髓损伤后的泌尿科随访的系统评价。

Systematic review of urological followup after spinal cord injury.

机构信息

Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

出版信息

J Urol. 2012 Feb;187(2):391-7. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.10.020. Epub 2011 Dec 15.

Abstract

PURPOSE

There is no consensus on the appropriate urological followup of individuals after spinal cord injury but it is well known that they are at risk for renal deterioration, bladder cancer and stones. We systematically reviewed the literature to evaluate evidence of urological screening in this population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We reviewed 385 abstracts, of which 50 met study inclusion criteria. We rated evidence using American Academy of Neurology 2004 guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 12 articles evaluated urinary tract infection screening. Patient reported symptoms used to predict urinary tract infection yielded mixed results and urine dipstick testing had the same accuracy as microscopy. Routine urine culture was unnecessary in healthy, asymptomatic individuals with normal urinalysis. Urodynamics probably must be done periodically (6 articles) but there was no information on frequency. In 11 articles ultrasound was recommended as a useful, noninvasive and possibly cost-effective screening method. Renal scan was a good method for further testing, especially if ultrasound was positive (11 articles). Evidence was sufficient (11 articles) to recommend ultrasound of the urinary tract to detect urinary tract stones with good sensitivity but not plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder (2 articles). There was insufficient evidence to recommend urine markers or cytology for bladder cancer screening (9 articles).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this review no definitive recommendations for screening can be made except routine renal ultrasound. Urodynamics are an important part of screening but the frequency is unclear. The optimum bladder cancer screening method has not been defined.

摘要

目的

脊髓损伤患者的泌尿科随访方法尚未达成共识,但众所周知他们存在肾功能恶化、膀胱癌和结石的风险。我们系统地回顾了文献,以评估该人群中进行泌尿科筛查的证据。

材料和方法

我们共审查了 385 篇摘要,其中 50 篇符合研究纳入标准。我们使用美国神经病学学会 2004 年的指南来评估证据。

结果

共有 12 篇文章评估了尿路感染筛查。患者报告的症状用于预测尿路感染的结果不一致,尿试纸检测与显微镜检查具有相同的准确性。对于尿液分析正常且无症状的健康个体,常规尿液培养是不必要的。定期进行尿动力学检查可能是必要的(6 篇文章),但没有关于频率的信息。在 11 篇文章中,超声被推荐为一种有用、无创且可能具有成本效益的筛查方法。在 11 篇文章中,肾脏扫描是进一步检查的良好方法,尤其是在超声阳性的情况下。有足够的证据(11 篇文章)推荐使用超声检查来检测尿路结石,具有良好的敏感性,但不推荐使用肾脏、输尿管和膀胱的普通 X 射线(2 篇文章)。没有足够的证据推荐尿液标志物或细胞学用于膀胱癌筛查(9 篇文章)。

结论

基于这项综述,除了常规的肾脏超声检查外,无法对筛查提出明确的建议。尿动力学检查是筛查的重要组成部分,但频率尚不清楚。尚未确定最佳的膀胱癌筛查方法。

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