Journals / Bakırköy Tıp Dergisi / 2006 / Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 4

Our ureterorenoscopic pneumatic lithotripsy experiences for distal ureteral stones

Distal üreter taşlarında üreteroskopik pnömatik litotripsi ile deneyimlerimiz

Pages
137–140
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: URS-PL is an effective and reliable method which can be used as a first-line option in treatment of distal ureteral stones.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: We have retrospectively evaluated the results of patients who have undergone ureterorenoscopic pneumatic lithotripsy (URSPL) for distal ureteral stones in our clinic.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Methods: One hundred and thirty patients who have undergone URS-PL between October 2003 and April 2006 were evaluated.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: URS-PL is an effective and reliable method which can be used as a first-line option in treatment of distal ureteral stones.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2003 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Ameliyat sonrası komplikasyonlar · Geriyedönük çalışma · Değerlendirme çalışmaları

Abstract

Objective: We have retrospectively evaluated the results of patients who have undergone ureterorenoscopic pneumatic lithotripsy (URSPL) for distal ureteral stones in our clinic. We have evaluated efficiency and reliability of URS-PL in treatment of distal ureteral stones. Material and Methods: One hundred and thirty patients who have undergone URS-PL between October 2003 and April 2006 were evaluated. Seventy-six (58.4%) and 54 (41.6%) of the patients were men and women, respectively. Mean age of the patients was 42.9±12 (range 22-74) years. 8.5 Fr/10 Fr rigid ureteroscope (Olympus, Germany) for ureteroscopy and pneumatic lithotripter (Elmed- Vibrolith,Turkey) for lithotripsy were used. While 110 patients (84.6%) have undergone URS-PL as a first-line treatment, it was performed as a second-line treatment in 20 patients (15.4%) after failed shock-wave lithotripsy (SWL). Mean stone size of the patients was 9.7±2.6 mm. Stone-free and complication rates of the patients were investigated. Results: Stones of 125 (96.2%) patients were disintegrated successfully with URS-PL. As 124 (95.4%) of them were stone-free within one month, a second URS-PL session was required in one patient. Open surgical procedure was performed in 2 patients (1.5%), one being due to ureteral perforation and one due to ureteral avulsion. SWL after ureteral catheter placement was performed in 3 patients due to proximal stone migration (2.3%). Conclusion: URS-PL is an effective and reliable method which can be used as a first-line option in treatment of distal ureteral stones.

Özet

Amaç: Kliniğimizde distal üreter taşı tanısı almış ve üreteroskopik pnömatik litotripsi (URS-PL) yapılmış olan hastalarımızdaki sonuçlarımızı geriye dönük olarak inceledik. Distal üreter taşlarında URS-PL’nin etkinliğini ve güvenilirliğini değerlendirdik. Gereç ve Yöntem: Ekim 2003-Nisan 2006 tarihleri arasında kliniğimizde URS-PL uygulanan 130 hasta incelendi. Olguların 76’sı erkek (%58.4), 54’ü kadındı (%41.6). Hastaların yaş ortalaması 42.9±12 (22-74) yıl olarak bulundu. Üreteroskopi için 8.5F/10F’lik rijid üreteroskop (Olympus, Germany), pnömotik litotripsi için ise Elmed-Vibrolith (Ankara, Türkiye) marka cihaz kullanıldı. Hastalarımızın 110’una (%84.6) URS-PL ilk tedavi olarak uygulanırken, 20’sine (%15.4) başarısız vücut-dışı şok dalgaları ile litotripsi (SWL) tedavisi sonrası uygulanmıştır. Hastaların ortalama taş boyutu 9.7±2.6 mm idi. Hastaların taştan temizlenme ve komplikasyon oranları incelendi. Bulgular: Hastalarımızın 125’inin (%96.2) taşları URS-PL ile başarılı bir şekilde kırıldı ve bunlardan 124’ü (%95.4) bir ay içinde taştan temizlenirken, bir vakada ikinci seans URS-PL yapıldı. Bir vakada üreter perforasyonu, bir vakada ise üreter avulsiyonu nedeniyle toplam iki vakada (%1.5) açık cerrahiye geçildi. Üç olguda (%2.3) ise proksimal migrasyon nedeni ile üreteral kateter takılarak SWL tedavisi uygulandı. Sonuç: URS-PL, distal üreter taşlarının tedavisinde ilk basamakta uygulanabilecek, etkin ve güvenli bir yöntemdir.

🔖

Cite This Article

TUĞCU, V., POLAT, H., KALFAZADE, N., GÜRBÜZ, G., TAŞÇI, A. İ. (2006). Our ureterorenoscopic pneumatic lithotripsy experiences for distal ureteral stones. Bakırköy Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 4, 137–140. https://ajindex.com/articles/131710

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Menon M, Resnick Ml. Urinary lithiasis: Etiology, diagnosis and medical management in Walsh PC, Retik AB, Vaughan ED, Vein AJ (Eds) Campbell's Urology, WB Saunders Company 2002
  2. Vol 4, s. 3229-3305 2. Puppo P, Ricciotti G, Bozzo W, Introini C. Primary endoscopic treatment of ureteric calculi. A review of 378 cases. Eur Urol 1999
  3. Biri H, Küpeli B, İsen K, Sinik 2, Karaoglan U, Bozkırlı I. Treatment of lower ureteral stones: extracorporeal Shockwave lithotripsy or intracorporeal lithotripsy?] Endourol 1999
  4. 81 4. Gönen M, Gürbüz ZG, Fazlıoğlu A. Alt üreter taşlarının tedavisinde primer üreteroskopi ve ESWL sonrası yapılan üreteroskopi sonuçlannın değerlendirilmesi. Türk Üroloji Dergisi 2002
  5. Sözen S, Küpeli B, Tunc L, et al. Management of ureteral stones with pneumatic lithotripsy: report of 500 patients. J Endourol 2003
  6. Bukkapatnam R, Seigne J, Helal M. One-step removal of encrusted reteined ureteral stents. J Urol 2003
  7. Zeng GH, li X, Wu Kj, Chen WZ. Endoscopic management of ureteral obstruction after radiotherapy. Ai Zheng 2004
  8. , 108-109. 8. Laven BA, O'Connor RC, Gerber GS, Steinberg GD. Long-term results of endoureterotomy and open surgical revision for the management of ureteroenteric strictures after urinary diversion. J Urol 2003
  9. Akpınar H, Tüfek I, Gürtuğ A, Kural AR. Üst üriner sistem hastalıklarının tanı ve tedavisinde fleksibl üreteroskopi. Türk Üroloji Dergisi 2003
  10. Segura JW. Ureteroscopy for lower ureteral stones. Urology 1993
  11. Peschel R, Janetschek G, Bartsch G. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy for distal ureteral calculi: A prospective randomized study. J Urol 1999
  12. Zeng GQ, Zhong WD, Cai YB, Dai QS, Hu JB, Wei HA. Extracorporeal shock wave versus pneumatic ureteroscopic lithotripsy in treatment of lower ureteral calculi. Asian J Androl 2002
  13. Martin VT, Sosa ER. Shock wave lithotripsy.ln: Walsh PC, Retik AB, Vaughan ED and Vain AJ (Eds) Campbell's Urology, Seventh edition, Philadelphia, Saunders, 1998, vol 3, s.2742. 14. Spirnak JP, Resnick Ml (Eds). Ureteroscopy In: Urolithiasis, Philadelphia, WB Saunders 1990, s. 253-276. 15. Doran Ş, Baydinç C, Zeren S, et al. Üreteroskopik girişimler ve sonuçlan. Türk Üroloji Dergisi 1991
  14. Knopf Hj, Graff HJ, Schulze H. Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in ureteroscopic stone removal. Eur Urol