Can operator-controlled imaging reduce fluoroscopy time during flexible ureterorenoscopy?

Michaël M. E. L. Henderickx, T. Brits, N. Zabegalina, J. Baard, Mansour Ballout, H. Beerlage, S. de Wachter, G. Kamphuis
{"title":"Can operator-controlled imaging reduce fluoroscopy time during flexible ureterorenoscopy?","authors":"Michaël M. E. L. Henderickx, T. Brits, N. Zabegalina, J. Baard, Mansour Ballout, H. Beerlage, S. de Wachter, G. Kamphuis","doi":"10.5173/ceju.2022.0210","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Fluoroscopy is routinely used during ureterorenoscopy. According to the ‘As Low As Reasonably Achievable’ (ALARA) principle, radiation exposure should be kept as low as reasonably achievable to decrease the risk of negative long-term effects of radiation for patients and medical staff. This study aims to assess if operator-controlled imaging during flexible ureterorenoscopy for nephrolithiasis could reduce fluoroscopy time when compared to radiographer-controlled imaging. Material and methods This study was a bicentric, retrospective comparison between patients treated for nephrolithiasis with flexible ureterorenoscopy with either operator-controlled imaging or radiographer-controlled imaging. A total of 100 patients were included, 50 were treated with operator-controlled imaging and 50 with radiographer-controlled imaging. Patients undergoing flexible ureterorenoscopy with a total stone burden <20 mm and data on radiation exposure were included. Patient characteristics, stone characteristics, surgical details and fluoroscopy time were recorded for each patient and both groups were compared. Patient data were expressed as median. A 2-sided p-value <0.005 was considered statistically significant. Results This study found no significant differences between both groups regarding the patient and stone characteristics. However, it found a significant shorter fluoroscopy time in the operator-controlled imaging group of 33.5 seconds (IQR 16.0–70.0) compared to 57.0 seconds (IQR 36.8–95.3) in the radiographer-controlled imaging group (p = 0.001). Conclusions This study shows that operator-controlled imaging in flexible ureterorenoscopy could reduce fluoroscopy time when compared to radiographer-controlled imaging. Operator-controlled imaging might therefore allow urologists to perform ureterorenoscopy with greater independence while additionally reducing fluoroscopy time and its consequent negative effects for medical staff and patients.","PeriodicalId":86295,"journal":{"name":"Urologia polska","volume":"75 1","pages":"90 - 95"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urologia polska","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2022.0210","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Introduction Fluoroscopy is routinely used during ureterorenoscopy. According to the ‘As Low As Reasonably Achievable’ (ALARA) principle, radiation exposure should be kept as low as reasonably achievable to decrease the risk of negative long-term effects of radiation for patients and medical staff. This study aims to assess if operator-controlled imaging during flexible ureterorenoscopy for nephrolithiasis could reduce fluoroscopy time when compared to radiographer-controlled imaging. Material and methods This study was a bicentric, retrospective comparison between patients treated for nephrolithiasis with flexible ureterorenoscopy with either operator-controlled imaging or radiographer-controlled imaging. A total of 100 patients were included, 50 were treated with operator-controlled imaging and 50 with radiographer-controlled imaging. Patients undergoing flexible ureterorenoscopy with a total stone burden <20 mm and data on radiation exposure were included. Patient characteristics, stone characteristics, surgical details and fluoroscopy time were recorded for each patient and both groups were compared. Patient data were expressed as median. A 2-sided p-value <0.005 was considered statistically significant. Results This study found no significant differences between both groups regarding the patient and stone characteristics. However, it found a significant shorter fluoroscopy time in the operator-controlled imaging group of 33.5 seconds (IQR 16.0–70.0) compared to 57.0 seconds (IQR 36.8–95.3) in the radiographer-controlled imaging group (p = 0.001). Conclusions This study shows that operator-controlled imaging in flexible ureterorenoscopy could reduce fluoroscopy time when compared to radiographer-controlled imaging. Operator-controlled imaging might therefore allow urologists to perform ureterorenoscopy with greater independence while additionally reducing fluoroscopy time and its consequent negative effects for medical staff and patients.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在输尿管软镜检查中,手术控制的显像能减少透视时间吗?
输尿管镜检查通常采用透视。根据“尽可能低”(ALARA)原则,辐射暴露应保持在尽可能低的水平,以减少辐射对患者和医务人员的长期负面影响的风险。本研究旨在评估在肾结石软性输尿管镜检查中,手术控制成像与x线透视控制成像相比,是否可以减少透视时间。材料和方法本研究是一项双中心、回顾性比较手术控制成像或x线仪控制成像的输尿管软镜治疗肾结石患者。共纳入100例患者,其中50例采用手术控制成像,50例采用放射技师控制成像。接受输尿管镜检查的总结石负荷<20 mm的患者和辐射暴露的数据被纳入。记录每位患者的患者特征、结石特征、手术细节和透视时间,并对两组患者进行比较。患者数据以中位数表示。双侧p值<0.005被认为具有统计学意义。结果本研究发现两组在患者和结石特征方面无显著差异。然而,它发现操作员控制的显像组的透视时间明显缩短,为33.5秒(IQR 16.0-70.0),而放射技师控制的显像组的透视时间为57.0秒(IQR 36.8-95.3) (p = 0.001)。结论在输尿管软性镜检查中,操作人员控制显像比x线机控制显像可减少透视时间。因此,操作员控制的成像可以使泌尿科医生更独立地进行输尿管镜检查,同时减少透视时间及其对医务人员和患者的负面影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Choosing a path for CEJU Location of ureteral access sheath in the ureter. Does it affect the fluid flow in different calyces? A new era and future of education: the impact of pandemic on online learning - a study from the European School of Urology. Spermatic vein thrombosis as a rare cause of testicular pain - review of the literature. Surgical outcomes of low-power thulium laser enucleation of prostates >80 g. One-year of follow-up.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1