MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1111/bju.16494

Медицинская библиотека · BJU international · 2024

Ureteroscopy vs laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for large proximal ureteric stone: a randomised trial.

Torricelli Fabio C M, Srougi Victor, Marchini Giovanni S, Vicentini Fabio C, Batagello Carlos A, Danilovic Alexandre, Arap Marco A, Andrade Hiury, Mitre Anuar I, Jordão Ricardo D, Monga Manoj, Nahas William C, Mazzucchi Eduardo

СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcomes of retrograde flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) with retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (RLU) for large proximal ureteric stones.

PATIENTS AND

METHODS

A prospective randomised trial was conducted from January 2018 through December 2022 including patients with impacted proximal ureteric stones of 15-25 mm. Patients underwent fURS or RLU. Primary outcome was the stone-free rate. Demographic data, stone features, and complications rates were also compared between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 64 patients were enrolled, 32 in each group. The mean impacted stone time was similar between groups, as well as stone size (17 mm) and stone density (>1000 Hounsfield Units). The ureteric stone-free rates between the two groups (93.7% in fURS vs 96.8% in RLU; odds ratio [OR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.72 to 3.17; P = 0.554), and overall success rates, which take into account residual fragments in the kidney (84.3% in fURS vs 93.7% in RLU; OR 1.02, 95% CI -0.69 to 2.74; P = 0.23), were similar. Operative time was also not statistically significantly different between groups (median 80 vs 82 min; P = 0.101). There was no difference in hospital length of stay. Retropulsion rate was higher with fURS (65.6% vs 3.1%; p < 0.001). Residual hydronephrosis (34.3% each group) and complication rates did no differ according to treatment.

CONCLUSION

Flexible URS and RLU are both highly efficient and present low morbidity for large impacted proximal ureteric stone treatment. RLU is not superior to fURS.

Для цитирования: Torricelli Fabio C M, Srougi Victor, Marchini Giovanni S, Vicentini Fabio C, Batagello Carlos A, Danilovic Alexandre, Arap Marco A, Andrade Hiury, Mitre Anuar I, Jordão Ricardo D, Monga Manoj, Nahas William C, Mazzucchi Eduardo. Ureteroscopy vs laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for large proximal ureteric stone: a randomised trial.. BJU international. 2024. DOI: 10.1111/bju.16494.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.