Al-Terki Abdullatif, Alkabbani Majd, Alenezi Talal A, Al-Shaiji Tariq F, Al-Mousawi Shabir, El-Nahas Ahmed R
Urology Unit, Al-Amiri Hospital, Kuwait City, Kuwait.
Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt.
Arab J Urol. 2020 Aug 25;19(2):137-140. doi: 10.1080/2090598X.2020.1813004.
To compare emergency with elective ureteroscopy (URS) for the treatment of a single ureteric stone.
The files of adult patients with a single ureteric stone were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with fever or turbid urine on passage of the guidewire beside the stone underwent ureteric stenting or nephrostomy drainage. Patients who underwent URS were included and divided into two groups: the emergency (EM) Group, those who presented with persistent renal colic and underwent emergency URS within 24 h; and the elective (EL) Group, who underwent elective URS after ≥14 days of diagnosis. Patients with ureteric stents were excluded. The technique for URS was the same in both groups. Safety was defined as absence of complications. Efficacy was defined as the stone-free rate after a single URS session.
From March 2015 to September 2018, 179 patients (107 in the EM Group and 72 in the EL Group) were included. There were significantly more hydronephrosis and smaller stones in the EM Group ( = 0.002 and = 0.001, respectively). Laser disintegration was needed in more patients in the EL Group (83% vs 68%, = 0.023). Post-URS ureteric stents were inserted in more patients in the EM Group (91% vs 72%, = 0.001). Complications were comparable for both groups (4.2% for EL and 5.6% for EM, = 0.665). Stone-free rates were also comparable (93% in the EL Group and 96% in the EM Group, = 0.336).
Emergency URS can be as safe and effective as elective URS for the treatment of a single ureteric stone if it is performed in patients without fever or turbid urine.: EL Group: elective group; EM Group: emergency group; KUB: plain abdominal radiograph of the kidneys, ureters and bladder; MET: medical expulsive therapy; NCCT: non-contrast CT; SFR: stone-free rate; SWL: shockwave lithotripsy; URS: ureteroscopy.
比较急诊与择期输尿管镜检查(URS)治疗单一输尿管结石的效果。
回顾性分析成年单一输尿管结石患者的病历资料。在导丝通过结石旁时出现发热或尿液浑浊的患者接受输尿管支架置入或肾造瘘引流。纳入接受URS治疗的患者并分为两组:急诊(EM)组,即出现持续性肾绞痛并在24小时内接受急诊URS的患者;择期(EL)组,即诊断后≥14天接受择期URS的患者。排除置入输尿管支架的患者。两组URS技术相同。安全性定义为无并发症。疗效定义为单次URS术后结石清除率。
2015年3月至2018年9月,共纳入179例患者(EM组107例,EL组72例)。EM组肾积水更多且结石更小(分别为P = 0.002和P = 0.001)。EL组更多患者需要激光碎石(83%对68%,P = 0.023)。EM组更多患者在URS术后置入输尿管支架(91%对72%,P = 0.001)。两组并发症发生率相当(EL组为4.2%,EM组为5.6%,P = 0.665)。结石清除率也相当(EL组为93%,EM组为96%,P = 0.336)。
对于单一输尿管结石的治疗,如果在无发热或尿液浑浊的患者中进行,急诊URS与择期URS一样安全有效。:EL组:择期组;EM组:急诊组;KUB:肾脏、输尿管和膀胱的腹部平片;MET:药物排石治疗;NCCT:非增强CT;SFR:结石清除率;SWL:冲击波碎石术;URS:输尿管镜检查。