COVID-19 疫情对尿路结石治疗的影响:跨越 9 个泌尿外科中心的多中心回顾性研究

G. Mazzon, S. Ferretti, E. Serafin, Francesco Claps, Pietro Acquati, Davide Brusa, F. Germinale, G. Celentano, Andrea Pescuma, A. Fugini, D. Campobasso, U. Maestroni, G. Costa, T. Morena, Flavia Di Marco, A. Baudo, M. Creta, Nicola Pavan, M. Ticonosco, Angelo Peroni, D. Collura, M. Cerruto, Alessandro Antonelli, L. Carmignani, Salvatore Micali, Carlo Trombetta, G. Muto, A. Celia
{"title":"COVID-19 疫情对尿路结石治疗的影响:跨越 9 个泌尿外科中心的多中心回顾性研究","authors":"G. Mazzon, S. Ferretti, E. Serafin, Francesco Claps, Pietro Acquati, Davide Brusa, F. Germinale, G. Celentano, Andrea Pescuma, A. Fugini, D. Campobasso, U. Maestroni, G. Costa, T. Morena, Flavia Di Marco, A. Baudo, M. Creta, Nicola Pavan, M. Ticonosco, Angelo Peroni, D. Collura, M. Cerruto, Alessandro Antonelli, L. Carmignani, Salvatore Micali, Carlo Trombetta, G. Muto, A. Celia","doi":"10.1097/cu9.0000000000000246","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has posed challenges to the global health care community, affecting the management of upper urinary tract stones.\n \n \n \n This retrospective study involved 9 Italian centers. We compared the 12-month period prior to COVID-19 (March 1, 2019, to February 28, 2020; Period A) with the COVID-19 period (March 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021, Period B). This study aimed to compare outcomes during Periods A and B, specifically focusing on the overall number of treatments, rate of urgent/elective cases, and operational complexity.\n \n \n \n A total of 4018 procedures were collected, comprising 2176 procedures during Period A and 1842 during Period B, indicating a loss of 15.35% (p < 0.001). In the elective cases, 1622 procedures were conducted in Period A, compared with 1280 in Period B, representing a 21.09% reduction in cases (p = 0.001). All types of stone treatments were affected: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (−29.37%, p = 0.001), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (−26.47%, p = 0.008), retrograde surgeries for renal stones (−10.63%, p = 0.008), and semirigid ureterolithotripsy (−24.86%, p = 0.008). Waiting lists experienced significant delays during Period B. The waiting time for elective procedures increased during Period B (p < 0.001). For ureteral stones, the mean waiting time in Period A was 61.44 days compared with 86.56 days in Period B (p = 0.008). The waiting time for renal stones increased from 64.96 days in Period A to 85.66 days in Period B for retrograde intrarenal surgery (p = 0.008) and from 96.9 days to 1103.9 days (p = 0.035) for percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures.\n \n \n \n Our study demonstrates that COVID-19 significantly disrupted endourological services across the country. Our data underline how patients received treatment over a prolonged period, potentially increasing the risk of stone-related complications and patient discomfort.\n","PeriodicalId":510120,"journal":{"name":"Current Urology","volume":"69 s99","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"COVID-19 outbreak impact on urolithiasis treatments: A multicenter retrospective study across 9 urological centers\",\"authors\":\"G. Mazzon, S. Ferretti, E. Serafin, Francesco Claps, Pietro Acquati, Davide Brusa, F. Germinale, G. Celentano, Andrea Pescuma, A. Fugini, D. Campobasso, U. Maestroni, G. Costa, T. Morena, Flavia Di Marco, A. Baudo, M. Creta, Nicola Pavan, M. Ticonosco, Angelo Peroni, D. Collura, M. Cerruto, Alessandro Antonelli, L. Carmignani, Salvatore Micali, Carlo Trombetta, G. Muto, A. Celia\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/cu9.0000000000000246\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n \\n The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has posed challenges to the global health care community, affecting the management of upper urinary tract stones.\\n \\n \\n \\n This retrospective study involved 9 Italian centers. We compared the 12-month period prior to COVID-19 (March 1, 2019, to February 28, 2020; Period A) with the COVID-19 period (March 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021, Period B). This study aimed to compare outcomes during Periods A and B, specifically focusing on the overall number of treatments, rate of urgent/elective cases, and operational complexity.\\n \\n \\n \\n A total of 4018 procedures were collected, comprising 2176 procedures during Period A and 1842 during Period B, indicating a loss of 15.35% (p < 0.001). In the elective cases, 1622 procedures were conducted in Period A, compared with 1280 in Period B, representing a 21.09% reduction in cases (p = 0.001). All types of stone treatments were affected: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (−29.37%, p = 0.001), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (−26.47%, p = 0.008), retrograde surgeries for renal stones (−10.63%, p = 0.008), and semirigid ureterolithotripsy (−24.86%, p = 0.008). Waiting lists experienced significant delays during Period B. The waiting time for elective procedures increased during Period B (p < 0.001). For ureteral stones, the mean waiting time in Period A was 61.44 days compared with 86.56 days in Period B (p = 0.008). The waiting time for renal stones increased from 64.96 days in Period A to 85.66 days in Period B for retrograde intrarenal surgery (p = 0.008) and from 96.9 days to 1103.9 days (p = 0.035) for percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures.\\n \\n \\n \\n Our study demonstrates that COVID-19 significantly disrupted endourological services across the country. Our data underline how patients received treatment over a prolonged period, potentially increasing the risk of stone-related complications and patient discomfort.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":510120,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Urology\",\"volume\":\"69 s99\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/cu9.0000000000000246\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/cu9.0000000000000246","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行给全球医疗界带来了挑战,影响了上尿路结石的治疗。 这项回顾性研究涉及 9 个意大利中心。我们将 COVID-19 之前的 12 个月(2019 年 3 月 1 日至 2020 年 2 月 28 日;A 阶段)与 COVID-19 期间(2020 年 3 月 1 日至 2021 年 2 月 28 日;B 阶段)进行了比较。本研究旨在对 A 期和 B 期的结果进行比较,特别关注总体治疗次数、紧急/选择性病例率和操作复杂性。 研究共收集了 4018 例手术,其中 A 期 2176 例,B 期 1842 例,损失率为 15.35%(p < 0.001)。在选择性病例中,A 阶段进行了 1622 例手术,而 B 阶段为 1280 例,病例数减少了 21.09%(p = 0.001)。所有类型的结石治疗都受到了影响:体外冲击波碎石(-29.37%,p = 0.001)、经皮肾镜碎石(-26.47%,p = 0.008)、肾结石逆行手术(-10.63%,p = 0.008)和半硬性输尿管碎石(-24.86%,p = 0.008)。候诊名单在 B 阶段出现了明显的延误。就输尿管结石而言,A 阶段的平均候诊时间为 61.44 天,而 B 阶段为 86.56 天(p = 0.008)。肾结石逆行肾内手术的等待时间从 A 期的 64.96 天增加到 B 期的 85.66 天(p = 0.008),经皮肾镜取石术的等待时间从 96.9 天增加到 1103.9 天(p = 0.035)。 我们的研究表明,COVID-19 严重扰乱了全国的腔内治疗服务。我们的数据强调了患者是如何长时间接受治疗的,这可能会增加结石相关并发症和患者不适的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
COVID-19 outbreak impact on urolithiasis treatments: A multicenter retrospective study across 9 urological centers
The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has posed challenges to the global health care community, affecting the management of upper urinary tract stones. This retrospective study involved 9 Italian centers. We compared the 12-month period prior to COVID-19 (March 1, 2019, to February 28, 2020; Period A) with the COVID-19 period (March 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021, Period B). This study aimed to compare outcomes during Periods A and B, specifically focusing on the overall number of treatments, rate of urgent/elective cases, and operational complexity. A total of 4018 procedures were collected, comprising 2176 procedures during Period A and 1842 during Period B, indicating a loss of 15.35% (p < 0.001). In the elective cases, 1622 procedures were conducted in Period A, compared with 1280 in Period B, representing a 21.09% reduction in cases (p = 0.001). All types of stone treatments were affected: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (−29.37%, p = 0.001), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (−26.47%, p = 0.008), retrograde surgeries for renal stones (−10.63%, p = 0.008), and semirigid ureterolithotripsy (−24.86%, p = 0.008). Waiting lists experienced significant delays during Period B. The waiting time for elective procedures increased during Period B (p < 0.001). For ureteral stones, the mean waiting time in Period A was 61.44 days compared with 86.56 days in Period B (p = 0.008). The waiting time for renal stones increased from 64.96 days in Period A to 85.66 days in Period B for retrograde intrarenal surgery (p = 0.008) and from 96.9 days to 1103.9 days (p = 0.035) for percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures. Our study demonstrates that COVID-19 significantly disrupted endourological services across the country. Our data underline how patients received treatment over a prolonged period, potentially increasing the risk of stone-related complications and patient discomfort.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Transperineal anastomotic urethroplasty with distal transection versus proximal transection: How to predict? An innovative and effective approach of cervical canal penetration in patients diagnosed with type II vaginal atresia with adequate uterine corpus development: a case series Efficacy of nonsolvent flower pollen extracts in healthy women with urinary incontinence: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel study COVID-19 outbreak impact on urolithiasis treatments: A multicenter retrospective study across 9 urological centers A meta-analysis comparing treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia with holmium laser enucleation and photoselective greenlight vaporization
×
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