Doersch Karen M, Hart Kyle D, Elmekresh Amr, Milburn Preston A, Machen G Luke, El Tayeb Marawan M
Department of Medical Physiology, Texas A&M Health Science Center College of MedicineTempleTexas.
Division of Urology, Baylor Scott and White HealthTempleTexas.
Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent). 2018 Oct 1;31(4):432-435. doi: 10.1080/08998280.2018.1482518. eCollection 2018 Oct.
This study compared patient outcomes following irrigation applied using an automated pressure system (AP) to hand irrigation utilizing a syringe (HI) during ureteroscopy. Retrospective chart review was performed to evaluate ureteroscopy procedures without a ureteral access sheath. Procedures in which irrigation was applied by AP were compared to those with HI. Statistical analyses included chi-squared tests and Student's tests. The AP group contained 206 procedures and the HI group, 25. The AP and HI groups were 54.9% and 36% male, respectively. Mean ages were 53.7 ± 18.9 years in the AP group and 44.0 ± 18.5 years in the HI group. Complication rates were 11.2% in the AP and 8.3% in the HI group ( > 0.99). One stone retrieval failure and one stone recurrence occurred in the HI group; one patient had residual stone in the AP group. No urinary tract infections occurred in the HI group; in the AP group, urinary tract infections occurred in 1.9% of cases. The postoperative pain incidence was equivalent ( = 0.498). The AP group had one subcapsular hematoma; no calyceal ruptures occurred in either group. In conclusion, irrigation applied by an automated setup appears safe, with similar outcomes to irrigation applied with a handheld syringe.
本研究比较了输尿管镜检查期间使用自动压力系统(AP)进行冲洗与使用注射器手动冲洗(HI)后的患者结局。进行回顾性病历审查以评估未使用输尿管通路鞘的输尿管镜检查程序。将采用AP进行冲洗的程序与采用HI的程序进行比较。统计分析包括卡方检验和学生t检验。AP组有206例手术,HI组有25例。AP组和HI组的男性比例分别为54.9%和36%。AP组的平均年龄为53.7±18.9岁,HI组为44.0±18.5岁。AP组的并发症发生率为11.2%,HI组为8.3%(P>0.99)。HI组发生1例结石取出失败和1例结石复发;AP组有1例患者残留结石。HI组未发生尿路感染;AP组尿路感染发生率为1.9%。术后疼痛发生率相当(P=0.498)。AP组有1例包膜下血肿;两组均未发生肾盏破裂。总之,自动装置冲洗似乎是安全的,其结局与手持注射器冲洗相似。