Journal of endourology · 2016
Best Stent Length Predicted by Simple CT Measurement Rather than Patient Height.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Barrett Keith, Foell Kirsten, Lantz Andrea, Ordon Michael, Lee Jason Y, Pace Kenneth T, Honey R John D'A
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Ureteral stent length is important, as stents that are too long might worsen symptoms and too short are at higher risk of migration. The purpose of this study was to determine if patient or radiologic parameters correlate with directly measured ureteral length and if directly measured ureteral length predicts proper stent positioning.
METHODS: During stent placement, ureteral length (ureteropelvic junction to ureterovesical junction distance) was directly measured by endoscopically viewing a ureteral catheter (with 1-cm marking) emanating from the ureteral orifice. A 22, 24, or 26 cm stent was chosen to be closest to the measured ureteral length. For ureters >26 cm, a 26 cm stent was chosen. Ends of an "ideally positioned" stent were fully curled in the renal pelvis and bladder, without crossing the bladder midline. Rates of ideal stent position were compared between patients with matching stent and ureteral lengths and those with stent lengths differing by ≥1 cm (mismatched). The measured ureteral length was correlated with patient height, L1-L5 height, and length measured on CT.
RESULTS: Fifty-nine ureters from 57 patients were included. Height was reasonably correlated with L1-L5 height (Spearman correlation coefficient [rho] = 0.79), although both were poorly correlated with directly measured ureteral length (rho = 0.18 for height and 0.32 for lumbar height). Ureteral lengths measured on CT correlated well with direct measurement (rho = 0.63 for axial cuts and rho = 0.64 for coronal cuts). Matched stent length was associated with higher rates of ideal stent position than mismatched (100% vs 70.9%, p = 0.006).
CONCLUSIONS: CT measurements, rather than height, correlate well with measured length and could be used to choose the appropriate stent length. Stents matching directly measured ureteral lengths are associated with high rates of ideal stent position.
METHODS: During stent placement, ureteral length (ureteropelvic junction to ureterovesical junction distance) was directly measured by endoscopically viewing a ureteral catheter (with 1-cm marking) emanating from the ureteral orifice. A 22, 24, or 26 cm stent was chosen to be closest to the measured ureteral length. For ureters >26 cm, a 26 cm stent was chosen. Ends of an "ideally positioned" stent were fully curled in the renal pelvis and bladder, without crossing the bladder midline. Rates of ideal stent position were compared between patients with matching stent and ureteral lengths and those with stent lengths differing by ≥1 cm (mismatched). The measured ureteral length was correlated with patient height, L1-L5 height, and length measured on CT.
RESULTS: Fifty-nine ureters from 57 patients were included. Height was reasonably correlated with L1-L5 height (Spearman correlation coefficient [rho] = 0.79), although both were poorly correlated with directly measured ureteral length (rho = 0.18 for height and 0.32 for lumbar height). Ureteral lengths measured on CT correlated well with direct measurement (rho = 0.63 for axial cuts and rho = 0.64 for coronal cuts). Matched stent length was associated with higher rates of ideal stent position than mismatched (100% vs 70.9%, p = 0.006).
CONCLUSIONS: CT measurements, rather than height, correlate well with measured length and could be used to choose the appropriate stent length. Stents matching directly measured ureteral lengths are associated with high rates of ideal stent position.