Progres en urologie : journal de l'Association francaise d'urologie et de la Societe francaise d'urologie · 2008
[Results of balloon nephrostomy in the treatment of lower urinary tract fistula].
Сравнительное исследованиеАннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Zairi A, Nohra J, Khedis M, Thoulouzan M, Otal P, Joffre F, Rischmann P, Plante P, Soulie M, Huyghe E
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To study the results of balloon nephrostomy urine drainage in the treatment of lower urinary tract fistula.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A series of 10 patients with lower urinary tract fistula was treated by balloon nephrostomy for tumour in eight cases and trauma in two cases with a palliative indication in two patients.
RESULTS: The duration of diversion ranged from seven to 210 days (mean: 55 days). The only incidents observed were three cases of urinary sepsis and four cases of nephrostomy tube or balloon migration. On removal of the nephrostomy, there were no signs of stenosis or other ureteric lesion. Balloon nephrostomy drainage achieved cure of the fistula in four cases, and allowed successful surgical repair in the other cases.
CONCLUSION: Balloon nephrostomy placement appears to constitute an alternative to surgical repair for lower urinary tract fistula. In the case of failure, it appears to allow surgical repair to be performed under better conditions than in the case of immediate surgery. However, these preliminary results need to be confirmed on larger series.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A series of 10 patients with lower urinary tract fistula was treated by balloon nephrostomy for tumour in eight cases and trauma in two cases with a palliative indication in two patients.
RESULTS: The duration of diversion ranged from seven to 210 days (mean: 55 days). The only incidents observed were three cases of urinary sepsis and four cases of nephrostomy tube or balloon migration. On removal of the nephrostomy, there were no signs of stenosis or other ureteric lesion. Balloon nephrostomy drainage achieved cure of the fistula in four cases, and allowed successful surgical repair in the other cases.
CONCLUSION: Balloon nephrostomy placement appears to constitute an alternative to surgical repair for lower urinary tract fistula. In the case of failure, it appears to allow surgical repair to be performed under better conditions than in the case of immediate surgery. However, these preliminary results need to be confirmed on larger series.