Ahmed Reda, Yaser Mahmoud Abdelsalam, Mohamed Loay Shehata, Salah El-Din Shaker, Mohammad Abbas Faragallah
{"title":"成人输尿管远端结石的超声与透视引导输尿管镜对照研究。","authors":"Ahmed Reda, Yaser Mahmoud Abdelsalam, Mohamed Loay Shehata, Salah El-Din Shaker, Mohammad Abbas Faragallah","doi":"10.1080/2090598X.2022.2087021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the safety and efficacy of ultrasound (US) as alternative to fluoroscopy for guidance of ureteroscopy (URS) during treatment of distal ureteric stones in adults.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This study enrolled 80 patients older than 18 years presented with a single distal ureteric radio-opaque stone of ≤15 mm in longest diameter. Patients were randomized and allocated into two groups: the fluoroscopy group and the ultrasound group (n = 40 patients in each group). Patients with bilateral ureteric stones, solitary kidney, ureteric congenital anomalies, history of failed ureteroscopy, history of ureteric surgery, patients with uremia and pregnant women were excluded. Patients' demographics, stone characteristics, operative data, stone-free status, hospital stay and complications were evaluated in both groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No statistically significant difference between both groups was found regarding patients' demographics and stone characteristics. Also there was no statistically significant difference in comparing fluoroscopy group versus ultrasound group regarding operative time (29.48 ± 15.3 versus 31.28 ± 18.24 min; P = 0.83), stone-free rate (97.5% versus 95%; P = 1.0), overall complications (15% versus 12.5%; P = 0.75), or hospital stay (1.17 ± 0.6 versus 1.02 ± 0.16 days; P = 0.12). Four patients (10%) in the ultrasound group required the addition of fluoroscopy beside ultrasound.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Ultrasound is effective in guidance during ureteroscopy for distal ureteric stones. It was comparable to fluoroscopy in terms of stone free rate, operative time, overall complications, and hospital stay. However, fluoroscopy must be available to be used when needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":8113,"journal":{"name":"Arab Journal of Urology","volume":"20 4","pages":"197-203"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9639490/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ultrasound versus fluoroscopy-guided ureteroscopy for distal ureteric stones in adults.\",\"authors\":\"Ahmed Reda, Yaser Mahmoud Abdelsalam, Mohamed Loay Shehata, Salah El-Din Shaker, Mohammad Abbas Faragallah\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/2090598X.2022.2087021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the safety and efficacy of ultrasound (US) as alternative to fluoroscopy for guidance of ureteroscopy (URS) during treatment of distal ureteric stones in adults.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This study enrolled 80 patients older than 18 years presented with a single distal ureteric radio-opaque stone of ≤15 mm in longest diameter. Patients were randomized and allocated into two groups: the fluoroscopy group and the ultrasound group (n = 40 patients in each group). Patients with bilateral ureteric stones, solitary kidney, ureteric congenital anomalies, history of failed ureteroscopy, history of ureteric surgery, patients with uremia and pregnant women were excluded. Patients' demographics, stone characteristics, operative data, stone-free status, hospital stay and complications were evaluated in both groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No statistically significant difference between both groups was found regarding patients' demographics and stone characteristics. Also there was no statistically significant difference in comparing fluoroscopy group versus ultrasound group regarding operative time (29.48 ± 15.3 versus 31.28 ± 18.24 min; P = 0.83), stone-free rate (97.5% versus 95%; P = 1.0), overall complications (15% versus 12.5%; P = 0.75), or hospital stay (1.17 ± 0.6 versus 1.02 ± 0.16 days; P = 0.12). Four patients (10%) in the ultrasound group required the addition of fluoroscopy beside ultrasound.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Ultrasound is effective in guidance during ureteroscopy for distal ureteric stones. It was comparable to fluoroscopy in terms of stone free rate, operative time, overall complications, and hospital stay. However, fluoroscopy must be available to be used when needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8113,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arab Journal of Urology\",\"volume\":\"20 4\",\"pages\":\"197-203\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9639490/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arab Journal of Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/2090598X.2022.2087021\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arab Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2090598X.2022.2087021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
目的:评价超声替代透视指导输尿管镜(URS)治疗成人输尿管远端结石的安全性和有效性。材料和方法:本研究纳入80例年龄大于18岁的患者,均为单一输尿管远端放射性不透明结石,最长直径≤15mm。将患者随机分为两组:透视组和超声组(每组40例)。排除双侧输尿管结石、孤立肾、输尿管先天性异常、输尿管镜检查失败史、输尿管手术史、尿毒症患者及孕妇。对两组患者的人口统计学、结石特征、手术资料、无结石状态、住院时间和并发症进行评估。结果:两组患者的人口统计学特征和结石特征无统计学差异。超声组与透视组在手术时间上的差异无统计学意义(29.48±15.3 min vs 31.28±18.24 min);P = 0.83),无结石率(97.5% vs 95%;P = 1.0),总并发症(15% vs 12.5%;P = 0.75)或住院时间(1.17±0.6 vs 1.02±0.16天;P = 0.12)。超声组4例(10%)患者需要在超声的基础上加行透视检查。结论:超声对输尿管镜下输尿管远端结石有较好的指导作用。在结石清除率、手术时间、总并发症和住院时间方面,它与透视相当。但是,必须在需要时进行透视检查。
Ultrasound versus fluoroscopy-guided ureteroscopy for distal ureteric stones in adults.
Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of ultrasound (US) as alternative to fluoroscopy for guidance of ureteroscopy (URS) during treatment of distal ureteric stones in adults.
Materials and methods: This study enrolled 80 patients older than 18 years presented with a single distal ureteric radio-opaque stone of ≤15 mm in longest diameter. Patients were randomized and allocated into two groups: the fluoroscopy group and the ultrasound group (n = 40 patients in each group). Patients with bilateral ureteric stones, solitary kidney, ureteric congenital anomalies, history of failed ureteroscopy, history of ureteric surgery, patients with uremia and pregnant women were excluded. Patients' demographics, stone characteristics, operative data, stone-free status, hospital stay and complications were evaluated in both groups.
Results: No statistically significant difference between both groups was found regarding patients' demographics and stone characteristics. Also there was no statistically significant difference in comparing fluoroscopy group versus ultrasound group regarding operative time (29.48 ± 15.3 versus 31.28 ± 18.24 min; P = 0.83), stone-free rate (97.5% versus 95%; P = 1.0), overall complications (15% versus 12.5%; P = 0.75), or hospital stay (1.17 ± 0.6 versus 1.02 ± 0.16 days; P = 0.12). Four patients (10%) in the ultrasound group required the addition of fluoroscopy beside ultrasound.
Conclusion: Ultrasound is effective in guidance during ureteroscopy for distal ureteric stones. It was comparable to fluoroscopy in terms of stone free rate, operative time, overall complications, and hospital stay. However, fluoroscopy must be available to be used when needed.
期刊介绍:
The Arab Journal of Urology is a peer-reviewed journal that strives to provide a high standard of research and clinical material to the widest possible urological community worldwide. The journal encompasses all aspects of urology including: urological oncology, urological reconstructive surgery, urodynamics, female urology, pediatric urology, endourology, transplantation, erectile dysfunction, and urinary infections and inflammations. The journal provides reviews, original articles, editorials, surgical techniques, cases reports and correspondence. Urologists, oncologists, pathologists, radiologists and scientists are invited to submit their contributions to make the Arab Journal of Urology a viable international forum for the practical, timely and state-of-the-art clinical urology and basic urological research.