Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes · 2012
The use of double-J catheter decreases complications of retroperitoneoscopic ureterolithotomy.
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.
Cavalli Alexandre Cavalheiro, Tambara Filho Renato, Slongo Luiz Edison, Cavalli Rafael Cavalheiro, Rocha Luiz Carlos de Almeida
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the retroperitoneoscopic ureterolithotomy in the treatment of ureteral calculi and the need for double-J catheter to reduce the procedure-related complications.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study with 47 patients submitted to retroperitoneoscopic ureterolithotomy, of which 31 were selected and divided into two groups: Group 1, whose patients did not have double-J catheter placement, and Group 2, who underwent perioperative double-J catheter implantation. Data collected comprised pre-and post-operative excretory urography, operative time, postoperative analgesia, length of hospital stay and catheter removal.
RESULTS: The groups were similar as for age and gender, degree of dilation of the urinary tract, position and average size of the calculi (Group 1 = 15.5 ± 6.6 mm, Group 2 = 16.3 ± 6.1 mm). Operative time was also not significantly different (Group 1 = 130 ± 40.3 min, Group 2 = 136.3 ± 49.3 min). Group 1 had six patients (37.5%) with early (four cases of urinary fistula) and late complications (one case of stenosis of the ureter, one case of functional exclusion of the operated kidney), while Group 2 had no complications. This difference was statistically significant (p = 0.011).
CONCLUSION: The use of double-J catheter was associated with significantly fewer complications in retroperitoneoscopic ureterolithotomy. Surgical time, postoperative analgesia and length of stay were similar between groups with and without catheter.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study with 47 patients submitted to retroperitoneoscopic ureterolithotomy, of which 31 were selected and divided into two groups: Group 1, whose patients did not have double-J catheter placement, and Group 2, who underwent perioperative double-J catheter implantation. Data collected comprised pre-and post-operative excretory urography, operative time, postoperative analgesia, length of hospital stay and catheter removal.
RESULTS: The groups were similar as for age and gender, degree of dilation of the urinary tract, position and average size of the calculi (Group 1 = 15.5 ± 6.6 mm, Group 2 = 16.3 ± 6.1 mm). Operative time was also not significantly different (Group 1 = 130 ± 40.3 min, Group 2 = 136.3 ± 49.3 min). Group 1 had six patients (37.5%) with early (four cases of urinary fistula) and late complications (one case of stenosis of the ureter, one case of functional exclusion of the operated kidney), while Group 2 had no complications. This difference was statistically significant (p = 0.011).
CONCLUSION: The use of double-J catheter was associated with significantly fewer complications in retroperitoneoscopic ureterolithotomy. Surgical time, postoperative analgesia and length of stay were similar between groups with and without catheter.