Urology · 2012
The effect of extralumenal safety wires on ureteral injury and insertion force of ureteral access sheaths: evaluation using an ex vivo porcine model.
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.
Graversen Joseph A, Valderrama Oscar M, Korets Ruslan, Mues Adam C, Landman Jaime, Badani Ketan K, Gupta Mantu
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect that a safety wire (SW) had on insertion force and direct ureteral trauma using ureteral access sheaths (UAS) in an ex vivo porcine model.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: UASs were advance into 20 fresh ex vivo porcine kidney-ureters, either with or without SWs. The average and max force of insertion were recorded. Retrograde saline injection was used to identify the presence of lacerations.
RESULTS: For SW vs no SW, the mean insertion force (1.79 vs 0.67, P = .0003, respectively) and max insertion force (2.29 kg vs 1.00, P = .0007) was greater in the SW group. There were 9 lacerations, 6 of which were partial and 3 complete. Of the partial injuries, 2 were in the no SW group and 4 were in the SW group. Of the complete lacerations, 2 occurred in the no SW group and 1 in the SW group. However, there was no significant difference in the total number of lacerations (P = 1.00), the number of partial lacerations (P = .628), or the number of complete lacerations (P = 1.00) between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of an SW significantly increases the force required to insert a UAS; however, it does not appear to affect the force or the degree of ureteral injury.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: UASs were advance into 20 fresh ex vivo porcine kidney-ureters, either with or without SWs. The average and max force of insertion were recorded. Retrograde saline injection was used to identify the presence of lacerations.
RESULTS: For SW vs no SW, the mean insertion force (1.79 vs 0.67, P = .0003, respectively) and max insertion force (2.29 kg vs 1.00, P = .0007) was greater in the SW group. There were 9 lacerations, 6 of which were partial and 3 complete. Of the partial injuries, 2 were in the no SW group and 4 were in the SW group. Of the complete lacerations, 2 occurred in the no SW group and 1 in the SW group. However, there was no significant difference in the total number of lacerations (P = 1.00), the number of partial lacerations (P = .628), or the number of complete lacerations (P = 1.00) between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of an SW significantly increases the force required to insert a UAS; however, it does not appear to affect the force or the degree of ureteral injury.