Journals / Ortadoğu Tıp Dergisi / 2013 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 3

Is Dilatation of The Ureteral Orifice Necessary Before Ureteroscopy

Üreteroskopi Öncesi Rutin Üreter Orifis Dilatasyonu Gerekli midir?

Pages
148–151
Publication Date
2022-10-18
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)

Results: The overall success rates for Gr1 and Gr 2 were %93,3 ve %92,9, respectively.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: To study the necessity of routine ureteral orifice dilatation prior to ureteric access during ureteroscopic pneu- matic lithotripsy(URS-PL).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: We performed ureteroscopy and pneumatic lithotripsy on 216 consecutive patients (122male, 94 female) between November 2006 and January 2010, with an age range of 17-72 years(40,2).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results: The overall success rates for Gr1 and Gr 2 were %93,3 ve %92,9, respectively.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2006 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: To study the necessity of routine ureteral orifice dilatation prior to ureteric access during ureteroscopic pneu- matic lithotripsy(URS-PL). Materials and Methods: We performed ureteroscopy and pneumatic lithotripsy on 216 consecutive patients (122male, 94 female) between November 2006 and January 2010, with an age range of 17-72 years(40,2). Ureteral orificedilatation was performed on the first group of patients(Gr 1, n:104) and not performed on the second group of patients(Gr2, n:112). The procedure was performed under general or spinal anesthesia with 8 Fr semirigid ureteroscopes.Olive tip bougie dilators were used for dilatation. Stone-free rates, complication rates, operation times and days ofhospitalization were noted. Results: The overall success rates for Gr1 and Gr 2 were %93,3 ve %92,9, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of success rates, complication rates and days of hospitalization.Mean operation times for the groups were 39,1±12,9 (18-70) and 29,8±10,1 (18-55) minutes, respectively, and wasstatistically significant (p=0,02)(Table 2). Conclusion: Dilatation of the orifice does not bring any advantage on experienced hands or faces the patients with anysignificant risk of complications. It only causes a loss of time during the operation and is not encouraged.

Özet

Amaç: Üreteroskopi ve pnömotik litotripsi vakalarımızda rutin üreter orifis dilatasyonunun gerekliliğini incelemek. Yöntem ve Gereçler: Kasım 2006 ile Ocak 2010 yılları arasında kliniğimizde, yaşları 17 ile 72 yıl arasındadeğişen(ortalama 40,2 yıl) ardışık 216 hastaya(122 erkek, 94 bayan) üreteroskopi ve pnömotik litotripsi uygulan- dı. Birinci grup hastaya (Gr 1, n: 104) işlem öncesinde üreteral dilatasyon uygulandı. İkinci grup hastaya ise (Gr 2,n:112) işlem öncesinde üreteral dilatasyon uygulanmadı. İşlem genel veya rejyonel anestezi altında, 8 Fr semirijitüreteroskop kullanılarak yapılmıştır. Gr 1 için dilatasyon işlemi zeytin uçlu dilatatörler ile yapılmıştır. Hastaların taş- sızlık (başarı) oranları, komplikasyon oranları, ameliyat süreleri, hastanede kalış süreleri incelenmiştir. Bulgular: Her iki grup için genel başarı oranı sırasıyla %93,3 ve %92,9dur. Başarı, komplikasyon oranları ve has- tanede kalış süreleri açısından gruplar arasında anlamlı fark saptanmamıştır. Ortalama operasyon süresi Gr 1 için39,1 ±12,9 (18-70) dakika, Gr 2 için 29,8 ±10,1 (18-55) dakika olarak kaydedilmiş olup fark istatistiksel olarakanlamlıdır(p=0,02)(Tablo 2). Sonuç: Üreter orifis dilatasyonu, tecrübeli ellerde sadece zaman kaybına yol açmakta, hastaya ek bir getirisi olma- dığı gibi herhangi bir olumsuz duruma da yol açmamaktadır. URS işlemi esnasında rutin orifis dilatasyonun gerek- li olmadığı kanaatindeyiz.

🔖

Cite This Article

BOZKURT, İ. H., ARSLAN, B., KOZACIOĞLU, Z., DEĞİRMENCİ, T., YONGUÇ, T., GÖNLÜSOY, B. (2022). Is Dilatation of The Ureteral Orifice Necessary Before Ureteroscopy. Ortadoğu Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 3, 148–151. https://ajindex.com/articles/585938

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Harmon WJ, Sershon PD, Blute ML, et al. Ureteroscopy: Current practice and long term complications. J Urol. 1997;157:28-32
  2. Zheng W and Denstedt JD. İntracorporal lithotripsy. Urol Clin of North Am. 2000;27(2):301-13
  3. Nagvii SA, Khaliq M, Zafar MN, Rizvi SA. Treatment of ureteric stones. Comparison of laser and pneumatic lithotripsy. Br J Urol. 1994;74:694-8
  4. Francesca F, Scattoni V, Nava L, Pompa P, Grasso M, Rigatti P. Fa- ilures and complications of transuretral ureteroscopy in 297 cases: Conventional rigid instruments vs. small caliber semirigid urete- roscope. Eur Urol. 1995;28:112-5
  5. Minowada S, Higashihara E, Kameyama S, Oshi M, Homma Y, Aso Y. Advantage of a smaller caliber fiberoscope and learning curve on transurethral lithotripsy. J Urol. 1992;147(5):1243-4
  6. Grasso M, Bagley D.: A 7.5/8.2 F actively defectable, flexible ure- teroscope: a new device for both diagnostic and therapeutic upper urinary tract endoscopy. Urology 1994;43(4):435-41
  7. Pang KK, Fuchs GJ.: Ureteral stents and flexible ureterorenos- copy. J Endourol. 1993;7(2):145-9
  8. Netto NR, Claro JA, Esteves SC, Andrade EF. Ureteroscopic stone removal of distal ureter: Why change? J Urol. 1997;157(6):2081-3
  9. Chen YT, Chen J, Wong WY, Yang SS, Hsieh CH, Wang CC. Is ureteral stenting necessary after uncomplicated ureteroscopic lit- hotripsy? J. Urol. 2002;167:1977-80
  10. Rane A, Cahill D,Larner T, Saleemi A, Tiptaft R. To stent or not to stent? J Endourol. 2000;14:479-81
  11. Hosking DH, Mc Colm SE, Smith WE. Is stenting following ure- teroscopy for removal of distal ureteral calculi necessary? J Urol. 1999;161(1):48-50
  12. Segura JW: Editorial: Ureteroscopy- current and future practice. J Urol. 1999;161(1):51
  13. Denstedt JD, Clayman RV. Electrohydraulic lithotripsy of renal and ureteral calculi. J Urol.1990;143(1):13-7
  14. Elashry OM, Di Meglio RB,Nakedo SY, McDougall EM, Clay- man RV. İntracorporeal electrohydraulic lithotripsy of ureteral and renal calculi using small caliber( 1.9 F) electrohydraulic lithotripsy probes. J. Urol. 1996;156(5):1581-5
  15. Yang SS, Hong JS. Electrohydraulic lithotripsy of upper ureteral calculi with semirigid ureteroscope. J Endourol. 1996;10(1):27-30
  16. Grocela JA, Dretler SP. Intracorporal lithotripsy. Urol Clin North Am.1997;24(1):13-23
  17. Hofbauer J,Hobarth K, Marberger M. Electrohydraulic versus pne- umatic disintegration in the treatment of ureteral stones: a rando- mized, prospective trial. J Urol. 1995;153:623-5. 1