Makale detayı · 2020 · article
Comparison of semirigid ureteroscopy, flexible ureteroscopy, and shock wave lithotripsy for initial treatment of 11-20 mm proximal ureteral stones
Veri kaynağı ayrımı
- YÖKSİSYÖKSİS makale kaydı
- YÖKSİS dergi adıArchivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia
- Katalog eşleşmesi (ISSN)Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia
- OpenAlexOpenAlex zenginleştirmesi (özet, atıf, konular)
- Semantic Scholaratıf sayısı (OpenAlex ile birleştirilmez)
Özet
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to retrospectively evaluate the effectiveness and safety of flexible ureteroscopy (f-URS), semirigid ureteroscopy (sr-URS), and shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) to treat single 11-20 mm stones in the proximal ureter. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients treated at our clinic for 11-20 mm single stones in the proximal ureter who underwent f-URS, sr-URS or SWL as initial lithotripsy methods were compared in terms of their clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes. RESULTS: A comparison among 201 patients who had undergone f-URS, 119 patients who had undergone sr-URS, and 162 patients who had undergone SWL showed no significant baseline differences in patients' demographic and stone characteristics. Stone-free rates on the 15th day and 3rd month were higher with f-URS (89.6% and 97%, respectively) than with sr-URS (67.2% and 94.1%, respectively) and SWL (41.4% and 79.0%, respectively; all p < 0.001). Retreatment rates were significantly higher with SWL than with the other two modalities (p < 0.001); auxiliary procedure rates were significantly lower with f-URS than with the other two modalities (p < 0.001). Treatment-related complication rate at the end of the 3rd month was lower with f-URS than with SWL (p = 0.022). Furthermore, f-URS was more effective than sr-URS for treating impacted stones. CONCLUSIONS: We found that f-URS was highly successful as an initial lithotripsy procedure for medium-sized proximal ureteral stones, and it helped achieve early stone-free outcomes with a lower need for retreatment and auxiliary procedures, lower complication rates, and higher effectiveness on the impacted stones compared with sr-URS and SWL.
Konular
Atıflar
OpenAlex cited_by_count. WoS veya Scopus atıf sayısı değildir; o kaynaklar için ayrı kolon yoktur.
18atıfOpenAlex · cited_by_count (önbellek / veritabanı)
Yerel katalogda bu makaleye atıf yapan 10 yayın (OpenAlex referans eşleşmesi; tam dünya listesi değildir).
- 2021 Effect of Endoscopic Ureteral Stone Treatment on Kidney FunctionAtıf 4 · OpenAlex
- 2021 Effect of Endoscopic Ureteral Stone Treatment on Kidney FunctionAtıf 4 · OpenAlex
- 2021 Effect of Endoscopic Ureteral Stone Treatment on Kidney FunctionAtıf 4 · OpenAlex
- 2026 Predictive Factors for Unsuccessful Holmium: YAG Laser Lithotripsy in the Retrograde Treatment of Proximal Ureteral StonesAtıf 0 · OpenAlex
- 2026 Predictive Factors for Unsuccessful Holmium: YAG Laser Lithotripsy in the Retrograde Treatment of Proximal Ureteral StonesAtıf 0 · OpenAlex
- 2023 Supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy in impacted proximal ureteral stones larger than 15 millimeters; Comparison of flexible ureterorenoscopy and retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomyAtıf 0 · OpenAlex
- 2021 Where Is It Logical to Break-Up A Ureter Stone with Endoscopic Surgery?Atıf 0 · OpenAlex
- 2021 Where is it logical to break-up a ureter stone with endoscopic surgery?Atıf 0 · OpenAlex
- 2021 Where is it logical to break-up a ureter stone with endoscopic surgery?Atıf 0 · OpenAlex
- 2021 Where is it logical to break-up a ureter stone with endoscopic surgery?Atıf 0 · OpenAlex