Dergiler / Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology / 2019 / Cilt: 25 - Sayı: 2

Percutaneous antegrade ureteral stent placement: single center experience

Sayfa
127–133
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

CONCLUSION Percutaneous antegrade ureteral stent placement is a safe and effective method for management of ureteral injuries and obstructions due to both malignant and benign causes when the retrograde approach has failed.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:PURPOSE We aimed to present our clinical experience with percutaneous antegrade ureteral stent placement in a single center.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:METHODS Electronic records of patients who underwent percutaneous image-guided ureteral stent placement between September 2005 and April 2017 were reviewed.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:CONCLUSION Percutaneous antegrade ureteral stent placement is a safe and effective method for management of ureteral injuries and obstructions due to both malignant and benign causes when the retrograde approach has failed.
🔬Tür:Literatür & Derleme Çalışması
📍Kapsam:2005 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

PURPOSE We aimed to present our clinical experience with percutaneous antegrade ureteral stent placement in a single center. METHODS Electronic records of patients who underwent percutaneous image-guided ureteral stent placement between September 2005 and April 2017 were reviewed. A total of 461 patients (322 males, 139 females; age range, 19–94 years; mean age, 61.4±15 years) were included in the study. Patients were classified into two main groups: those with neoplastic disease and those with non-neoplastic disease. Failure was defined as persistence of high level of serum creatinine or an inability to place stents percutaneously. Postprocedural complications were grouped as percutaneous nephrostomy and stent placement related complications. RESULTS A total of 727 procedures in 461 patients were included in the study: 654 procedures (90%) in 407 patients (88.3%) were in the neoplastic group and 73 procedures (10%) in 54 patients (11.7%) were in the non-neoplastic group. Our technical success rates were 97.7% and 100% and complication rates were 3.1% and 4.1% in neoplastic and non-neoplastic groups, respectively. Seven stents retrievals and 112 balloon dilatations were performed successfully. CONCLUSION Percutaneous antegrade ureteral stent placement is a safe and effective method for management of ureteral injuries and obstructions due to both malignant and benign causes when the retrograde approach has failed.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

KAHRİMAN, G., ÖZCAN, N., DOĞAN, A., İMAMOĞLU, H., DEMİRTAŞ, A. (2019). Percutaneous antegrade ureteral stent placement: single center experience. Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Cilt: 25 - Sayı: 2, 127–133. https://ajindex.com/articles/160312

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (16)

  1. Dowling RA, Corriere JN Jr, Sandler CM. Iatrogenic ureteral injury. J Urol 1986
  2. 912–915. [CrossRef] 2. Zimskind PD, Fetter TR, Wilkerson JL. Clinical use of long-term indwelling silicone rubber ureteral splints inserted cystoscopically. J Urol 1967
  3. 840–844. [CrossRef] 3. Makramalla A, Zuckerman DA. Nephroureteral stents: principles and techniques. Semin Intervent Radiol 2011
  4. 367–379. [CrossRef] 4. Herr A, Malhotra A, White M, Siskin G. Ureteral Interventions. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol 2016
  5. 182–193. [CrossRef] 5. Fiuk J, Bao Y, Calleary JG, Schwartz BF, Denstedt JD. The use of internal stents in chronic ureteral obstruction. J Urol 2015
  6. 1092–1100. [CrossRef] 6. Thornton RH, Covey AM. Urinary drainage procedures in ınterventional radiology. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol 2016
  7. 170–181. [CrossRef] 7. Hausegger KA, Portugaller HR. Percutaneous nephrostomy and antegrade ureteral stenting: technique-indications-complications. Eur Radiol 2006
  8. 2016–2030. [CrossRef] 8. Wang JY, Zhang HL, Zhu Y, Qin XJ, Dai BO, Ye DW. Predicting the failure of retrograde ureteral stent insertion for managing malignant ureteral obstruction in outpatients. Oncol Lett 2016
  9. 879–883. [CrossRef] 9. Kamiyama Y, Matsuura S, Kato M, Abe Y, Takyu S, Yoshikawa K, Arai Y. Stent failure in the management of malignant extrinsic ureteral obstruction: risk factors. Int J Urol 2011
  10. 379– 382. [CrossRef] 10. Wenzler DL, Kim SP, Rosevear HM, Faerber GJ, Roberts WW, Wolf JS Jr. Success of ureteral stents for intrinsic ureteral obstruction. J Endourol 2008
  11. 295–299. [CrossRef] 11. Rosevear HM, Kim SP, Wenzler DL, Faerber GJ, Roberts WW, Wolf JS Jr. Retrograde ureteral stents for extrinsic ureteral obstruction: nine years' experience at University of Michigan. Urology 2007
  12. 846–850. [CrossRef] 12. Kanou T, Fujiyama C, Nishimura K, Tokuda Y, Uozumi J, Masaki Z. Management of extrinsic malignant ureteral obstruction with urinary diversion. Int J Urol 2007
  13. 689–692. [CrossRef] 13. Ganatra AM, Loughlin KR. The management of malignant ureteral obstruction treated with ureteral stents. J Urol 2005
  14. 2125–2128. [CrossRef] 14. Pabon-Ramos WM, Dariushnia SR, Walker TG, et al
  15. Society of Interventional Radiology Standards of Practice Committee. Quality Improvement Guidelines for Percutaneous Nephrostomy. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2016
  16. 410–414. [CrossRef] 15. Vanderbrink BA, Rastinehad AR, Ost MC, Smith AD. Encrusted urinary stents: evaluation and endourologic management. J