Nihon Hinyokika Gakkai zasshi. The japanese journal of urology · 1996
[Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral stone using a piezoelectric lithotriptor--usefulness of treatment on an outpatient clinic].
Клиническое 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.
Yamashita T, Umeda S, Matsushita T
Аннотация
PURPOSE: We have clarified the usefulness of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for patients with ureteral stone in an outpatient clinic.
PATIENTS AND METHOD: One hundred ten patients with ureteral stone were treated using a small focused piezoelectric lithotriptor (Toshiba ESL-500A). No anesthesia and no associated therapy was applied to all patients.
RESULTS: Ninety eight patients (89.1%) were successfully treated in our outpatient clinic. Twelve patients (10.1%) were treated after admission because of several reasons such as colicky attack. In 107 patients (97.3%) no remaining stone was observed. We judged our treatment was effective in 109 patients (99.1%) including 2 cases with very small remaining fragment. No serious complication was encountered. In 83 cases with ureteral stone smaller than 10 mm in longer diameter, mean treatment sessions was 1.24 and mean total shots was 3,227. In contrast, in 27 cases with ureteral stone bigger than 10 mm, mean 2.67 sessions and 11,715 shots was needed. Although some patients with bigger stone underwent several sessions up to 9 times, all of them had no problem before completion of treatment.
CONCLUSION: These results indicated that most of patients with ureteral stone can be simply treated in an outpatient clinic using a small focused piezoelectric lithotriptor.
PATIENTS AND METHOD: One hundred ten patients with ureteral stone were treated using a small focused piezoelectric lithotriptor (Toshiba ESL-500A). No anesthesia and no associated therapy was applied to all patients.
RESULTS: Ninety eight patients (89.1%) were successfully treated in our outpatient clinic. Twelve patients (10.1%) were treated after admission because of several reasons such as colicky attack. In 107 patients (97.3%) no remaining stone was observed. We judged our treatment was effective in 109 patients (99.1%) including 2 cases with very small remaining fragment. No serious complication was encountered. In 83 cases with ureteral stone smaller than 10 mm in longer diameter, mean treatment sessions was 1.24 and mean total shots was 3,227. In contrast, in 27 cases with ureteral stone bigger than 10 mm, mean 2.67 sessions and 11,715 shots was needed. Although some patients with bigger stone underwent several sessions up to 9 times, all of them had no problem before completion of treatment.
CONCLUSION: These results indicated that most of patients with ureteral stone can be simply treated in an outpatient clinic using a small focused piezoelectric lithotriptor.