单次切除遗忘结壳输尿管支架:联合腔内入路。

Urological Research Pub Date : 2012-10-01 Epub Date: 2011-12-11 DOI:10.1007/s00240-011-0442-2
Yakup Bostanci, Ender Ozden, Fatih Atac, Yarkin Kamil Yakupoglu, Ali Faik Yilmaz, Saban Sarikaya
{"title":"单次切除遗忘结壳输尿管支架:联合腔内入路。","authors":"Yakup Bostanci,&nbsp;Ender Ozden,&nbsp;Fatih Atac,&nbsp;Yarkin Kamil Yakupoglu,&nbsp;Ali Faik Yilmaz,&nbsp;Saban Sarikaya","doi":"10.1007/s00240-011-0442-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Forgotten ureteral stents represent a difficult problem for urologists; the major complications are infection, migration, encrustation, stone formation, and multifractured stent, and a consensus on the best therapeutic approach is lacking. Here we present our experience with endoscopic management of this challenging problem and discuss the various endourological approaches for treating forgotten encrusted ureteral stents. From January 2005 to December 2010, 19 patients (11 women and 8 men) with encrusted ureteral stents were retrospectively analyzed. Combined endourologic therapies including extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), ureterorenoscopic lithotripsy (URSL), and cystolithotripsy (CLT) were used to achieve stent removal. A total of 19 patients with encrusted ureteral stents were treated at our center. The mean patient age was 46.2 ± 18.5 years (8-81), the average indwelling time of the stent was 24.7 ± 19.0 months (8-93), and the mean hospital stay was 3.4 ± 4.0 days (range 1-15 days). Using the described combination of techniques, all stents and the associated stones were eventually removed without any complications and patients were rendered stone- and stent-free. A main element of the treatment strategy was to keep the number of interventions as low as possible. The use of various combinations of endourological techniques can achieve effective stent and stone treatment after a single anesthesia session with minimal morbidity and short hospital stay.</p>","PeriodicalId":23412,"journal":{"name":"Urological Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s00240-011-0442-2","citationCount":"29","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Single session removal of forgotten encrusted ureteral stents: combined endourological approach.\",\"authors\":\"Yakup Bostanci,&nbsp;Ender Ozden,&nbsp;Fatih Atac,&nbsp;Yarkin Kamil Yakupoglu,&nbsp;Ali Faik Yilmaz,&nbsp;Saban Sarikaya\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00240-011-0442-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Forgotten ureteral stents represent a difficult problem for urologists; the major complications are infection, migration, encrustation, stone formation, and multifractured stent, and a consensus on the best therapeutic approach is lacking. Here we present our experience with endoscopic management of this challenging problem and discuss the various endourological approaches for treating forgotten encrusted ureteral stents. From January 2005 to December 2010, 19 patients (11 women and 8 men) with encrusted ureteral stents were retrospectively analyzed. Combined endourologic therapies including extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), ureterorenoscopic lithotripsy (URSL), and cystolithotripsy (CLT) were used to achieve stent removal. A total of 19 patients with encrusted ureteral stents were treated at our center. The mean patient age was 46.2 ± 18.5 years (8-81), the average indwelling time of the stent was 24.7 ± 19.0 months (8-93), and the mean hospital stay was 3.4 ± 4.0 days (range 1-15 days). Using the described combination of techniques, all stents and the associated stones were eventually removed without any complications and patients were rendered stone- and stent-free. A main element of the treatment strategy was to keep the number of interventions as low as possible. The use of various combinations of endourological techniques can achieve effective stent and stone treatment after a single anesthesia session with minimal morbidity and short hospital stay.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23412,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Urological Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s00240-011-0442-2\",\"citationCount\":\"29\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Urological Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-011-0442-2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2011/12/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urological Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-011-0442-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2011/12/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29

摘要

遗忘输尿管支架对泌尿科医生来说是一个难题;主要的并发症是感染、移位、结痂、结石形成和支架多骨折,目前还缺乏最佳治疗方法的共识。在这里,我们将介绍我们在内镜下治疗这一具有挑战性的问题的经验,并讨论治疗遗忘结痂输尿管支架的各种内镜方法。回顾性分析2005年1月至2010年12月19例输尿管支架结膜患者(女11例,男8例)的临床资料。采用体外冲击波碎石术(SWL)、经皮肾镜碎石术(PCNL)、输尿管镜碎石术(URSL)和膀胱碎石术(CLT)等联合泌尿系统治疗实现支架取出。本中心共收治输尿管内支架结痂患者19例。患者平均年龄46.2±18.5岁(8-81),平均支架放置时间24.7±19.0个月(8-93),平均住院时间3.4±4.0天(1-15天)。使用上述技术组合,所有支架和相关结石最终均被移除,无任何并发症,患者均无结石和无支架。治疗策略的一个主要内容是尽可能减少干预措施的数量。使用不同的腔内技术组合可以在单次麻醉后实现有效的支架和结石治疗,发病率低,住院时间短。
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
Single session removal of forgotten encrusted ureteral stents: combined endourological approach.

Forgotten ureteral stents represent a difficult problem for urologists; the major complications are infection, migration, encrustation, stone formation, and multifractured stent, and a consensus on the best therapeutic approach is lacking. Here we present our experience with endoscopic management of this challenging problem and discuss the various endourological approaches for treating forgotten encrusted ureteral stents. From January 2005 to December 2010, 19 patients (11 women and 8 men) with encrusted ureteral stents were retrospectively analyzed. Combined endourologic therapies including extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), ureterorenoscopic lithotripsy (URSL), and cystolithotripsy (CLT) were used to achieve stent removal. A total of 19 patients with encrusted ureteral stents were treated at our center. The mean patient age was 46.2 ± 18.5 years (8-81), the average indwelling time of the stent was 24.7 ± 19.0 months (8-93), and the mean hospital stay was 3.4 ± 4.0 days (range 1-15 days). Using the described combination of techniques, all stents and the associated stones were eventually removed without any complications and patients were rendered stone- and stent-free. A main element of the treatment strategy was to keep the number of interventions as low as possible. The use of various combinations of endourological techniques can achieve effective stent and stone treatment after a single anesthesia session with minimal morbidity and short hospital stay.

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
Urological Research
Urological Research 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊最新文献
A simple and rapid colorimetric method for determination of phytate in urine. Hyperoxaluric rats do not exhibit alterations in renal expression patterns of Slc26a1 (SAT1) mRNA or protein. Studies on the in vitro and in vivo antiurolithic activity of Holarrhena antidysenterica. Ureteroscopy-assisted retrograde nephrostomy (UARN) for an incomplete double ureter. Urgent shock wave lithotripsy as first-line treatment for ureteral stones: a meta-analysis of 570 patients.
×
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