Suppr超能文献

经皮顺行双 J 输尿管支架置入术的比较:直接入路与经皮肾造瘘途径。

Comparison of percutaneous antegrade double-J ureteral stent placement: first-hand vs. nephrostomy route approaches.

机构信息

Department of Radiology, Pamukkale University Faculty of Medicine, Denizli, 20070, Turkey.

Department of Radiology, Denizli State Hospital, Denizli, 20040, Turkey.

出版信息

Br J Radiol. 2024 Oct 1;97(1162):1683-1689. doi: 10.1093/bjr/tqae143.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to conduct a comparative analysis of procedural efficacy, safety, and patient outcomes between 2 distinct approaches for percutaneous antegrade double-J ureteral stent (DJS) insertion: the first-hand approach and via a nephrostomy route.

METHODS

Electronic records of patients undergoing percutaneous antegrade ureteral DJS placement from January 2016 to 2023 were reviewed. Patients were categorized into 2 groups based on stent placement technique: the first-hand group, involving a single-stage approach without prior percutaneous nephrostomy catheter insertion, and the nephrostomy group, where stent placement occurred through a percutaneous nephrostomy tube. Clinical data, including patient demographics, primary diagnoses, procedural details, complication rates, stent placement success, and post-procedural outcomes, were collected and analysed.

RESULTS

Both approaches demonstrated high technical success rates (93.1%). However, the nephrostomy route group exhibited a comparatively higher fluoroscopy exposure rate (8.2 min) than the first-hand group (6.8 min). Moreover, the complication risk increased by 3.08 times in patients treated with the nephrostomy method (P = .047). Notably, in cases of urinary malignancies, the preference was for placing DJS via nephrostomy.

CONCLUSION

The first-hand approach should be prioritized as the initial choice in suitable cases owing to its reduced fluoroscopy time, lower complication rate, and the single-stage nature of the procedure.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

With the exception of cases necessitating urgent drainage, such as post-renal acute renal failure and urosepsis, the first-hand method is the primary approach for inserting DJS. This is primarily due to the significantly shorter radiation time and the single-stage nature of the procedure.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在对比经皮顺行双 J 输尿管支架(DJS)置入术两种不同方法的操作疗效、安全性和患者结局,即直接法和经皮肾造瘘途径。

方法

回顾 2016 年 1 月至 2023 年期间行经皮顺行输尿管 DJS 置入术患者的电子病历。根据支架置入技术将患者分为两组:直接组,采用单次操作、无需经皮肾造瘘管插入的方法;经皮肾造瘘组,通过经皮肾造瘘管置入支架。收集并分析患者的临床数据,包括人口统计学、主要诊断、操作细节、并发症发生率、支架置入成功率和术后结局。

结果

两种方法均具有较高的技术成功率(93.1%)。然而,经皮肾造瘘组的透视曝光率(8.2 分钟)明显高于直接组(6.8 分钟)。此外,经皮肾造瘘组的并发症风险增加了 3.08 倍(P=.047)。值得注意的是,对于尿路上皮恶性肿瘤患者,更倾向于经皮肾造瘘放置 DJS。

结论

在合适的病例中,应优先选择直接法,因其透视时间更短、并发症发生率更低,且操作具有单阶段特性。

知识进展

除了需要紧急引流的情况,如肾后性急性肾衰竭和尿脓毒症外,首选直接法置入 DJS。这主要是由于辐射时间显著缩短,且操作具有单阶段特性。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

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