Urologia · 2021
Can stone migration be predicted preoperatively in ureteroscopic lithotripsy?
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.
Arıman Ahmet, Merder Erkan, Sezgin Mehmet Ali, Önol Suzan
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: In our study, we aimed to evaluate the parameters that are effective in predicting the possibility of stone migration during ureteroscopic lithotripsy.
PATIENTS AND METHOD: We divided our patients two group whom we applied ureteroscopic lithotripsy. Patients who migrated stones during ureteroscopic manipulation to the 1st group, and the patients who did not migrate stones to the second group were included. We measured the proximal ureter diameters of the patients in both groups on their computed tomography. We compared these values statistically. In addition, we determined a cut-off value for the ureter diameter to predict the possibility of stone migration.
RESULT: Especially, ureter diameters of patients with middle and lower ureter stones showed significant differences between groups. Also, stone sizes differed significantly between groups.
CONCLUSION: We concluded that the possibility of stone migration is high in patients with a ureter diameter higher than 7.45 mm in the middle and lower ureteric stones. Also, we believe that stone diameter and the surgeon's experience are effective factors in stone migration.
PATIENTS AND METHOD: We divided our patients two group whom we applied ureteroscopic lithotripsy. Patients who migrated stones during ureteroscopic manipulation to the 1st group, and the patients who did not migrate stones to the second group were included. We measured the proximal ureter diameters of the patients in both groups on their computed tomography. We compared these values statistically. In addition, we determined a cut-off value for the ureter diameter to predict the possibility of stone migration.
RESULT: Especially, ureter diameters of patients with middle and lower ureter stones showed significant differences between groups. Also, stone sizes differed significantly between groups.
CONCLUSION: We concluded that the possibility of stone migration is high in patients with a ureter diameter higher than 7.45 mm in the middle and lower ureteric stones. Also, we believe that stone diameter and the surgeon's experience are effective factors in stone migration.