The American journal of emergency medicine · 2018
Evaluation of the clinical significance of sonographic perinephric fluid in patients with renal colic.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Nadav Granat, Eyal Klang, Noam Tau, Yeruham Kleinbaum
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the significance of sonographic perinephric fluid collection on the emergent management of patients with acute urinary stone obstruction.
METHODS: We conducted a prospective study with retrospective analysis. Since January 2016 through July 2017, patients admitted to our tertiary hospital's emergency department (ED) with suspected symptomatic urinary stones underwent ultrasound evaluation. Images were prospectively interpreted by experienced radiologist who analyzed each case for the following imaging features: hydronephrosis, perinephric fluid and urethral stone identification. The presence and measurements of perinephric fluid were re-evaluated by second radiologist who was blinded for the first reader's measurements. Retrospective analysis was conducted to evaluate for an association between perinephric fluid collection and the following outcome variables: need for analgesics, the number of doses of analgesics and the amount of morphine (mg) in the ED, elevation of creatinine levels, hospitalization and need for urological interventions.
RESULTS: The need for analgesics, the number of doses of analgesics and the amount of morphine were significantly associated with the presence of perinephric fluid (p < 0.05). The odds ratio for the need for analgesics was 3.8 in the presence of any perinephric fluid, and 8.9 in the presence of moderate/severe perinephric fluid. No other patient outcome variables were found to be significantly associated with the presence of perinephric fluid (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: This study shows a correlation between sonographic evidence of perinephric fluid and more severe pain. Therefore, an emergency physician can consider the evidence of perinephric fluid, in acute urethral stone obstruction, a predictor for more severe pain.
METHODS: We conducted a prospective study with retrospective analysis. Since January 2016 through July 2017, patients admitted to our tertiary hospital's emergency department (ED) with suspected symptomatic urinary stones underwent ultrasound evaluation. Images were prospectively interpreted by experienced radiologist who analyzed each case for the following imaging features: hydronephrosis, perinephric fluid and urethral stone identification. The presence and measurements of perinephric fluid were re-evaluated by second radiologist who was blinded for the first reader's measurements. Retrospective analysis was conducted to evaluate for an association between perinephric fluid collection and the following outcome variables: need for analgesics, the number of doses of analgesics and the amount of morphine (mg) in the ED, elevation of creatinine levels, hospitalization and need for urological interventions.
RESULTS: The need for analgesics, the number of doses of analgesics and the amount of morphine were significantly associated with the presence of perinephric fluid (p < 0.05). The odds ratio for the need for analgesics was 3.8 in the presence of any perinephric fluid, and 8.9 in the presence of moderate/severe perinephric fluid. No other patient outcome variables were found to be significantly associated with the presence of perinephric fluid (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: This study shows a correlation between sonographic evidence of perinephric fluid and more severe pain. Therefore, an emergency physician can consider the evidence of perinephric fluid, in acute urethral stone obstruction, a predictor for more severe pain.