BJU international · 1999
Extra-anatomic stents in ureteric obstruction: experience and complications.
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.
Minhas S, Irving H C, Lloyd S N, Eardley I, Browning A J, Joyce A D
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To assess the role of extra-anatomic stents (EAS) as a means of urinary diversion in patients with ureteric obstruction secondary to malignancy.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: The technique for inserting EAS in patients with ureteric obstruction was described previously; to date, 13 patients (seven women and six men, mean age 45.3 years, range 22-78) have been treated. All patients had ultrasonographic evidence of hydronephrosis and/or significant biochemical evidence of renal impairment. Patients had advanced malignancy and one patient an abdominal aortic aneurysm.
RESULTS: Urinary diversion was successful in all patients; two survived for more than 1 year, with stent changes at 6-monthly intervals. In three patients the stents were replaced by percutaneous nephrostomies because of problems with leakage or infection. The remaining patients died with functioning EAS in situ.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ureteric obstruction secondary to malignancy or medical conditions excluding them from more invasive surgery, EAS provide a further therapeutic option instead of a permanent nephrostomy, which has associated inherent problems. This technique is not without potential problems and careful selection of patients remains vital in this difficult area.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: The technique for inserting EAS in patients with ureteric obstruction was described previously; to date, 13 patients (seven women and six men, mean age 45.3 years, range 22-78) have been treated. All patients had ultrasonographic evidence of hydronephrosis and/or significant biochemical evidence of renal impairment. Patients had advanced malignancy and one patient an abdominal aortic aneurysm.
RESULTS: Urinary diversion was successful in all patients; two survived for more than 1 year, with stent changes at 6-monthly intervals. In three patients the stents were replaced by percutaneous nephrostomies because of problems with leakage or infection. The remaining patients died with functioning EAS in situ.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ureteric obstruction secondary to malignancy or medical conditions excluding them from more invasive surgery, EAS provide a further therapeutic option instead of a permanent nephrostomy, which has associated inherent problems. This technique is not without potential problems and careful selection of patients remains vital in this difficult area.