Urologia internationalis · 2017
Impaction and Prediction: Does Ureteral Wall Thickness Affect the Success of Medical Expulsive Therapy in Pediatric Ureteral Stones?
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.
Tuerxun Aierken, Batuer Abudukahaer, Erturhan Sakip, Eryildirim Bilal, Camur Emre, Sarica Kemal
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to evaluate the predictive value of ureteral wall thickness (UWT) and stone-related parameters for medical expulsive therapy (MET) success with an alpha blocker in pediatric upper ureteral stones.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 35 children receiving MET ureteral stones (<10 mm) were evaluated. Patients were divided into 2 subgroups where MET was successful in 18 children (51.4%) and unsuccessful in 17 children (48.6%). Prior to management, stone size, stone density (in Hounsfield unit), degree of hydronephrosis, and UWT were evaluated with patient demographics and recorded. The possible predictive value of these parameters in success rates and time to stone expulsion were evaluated in a comparative manner between the 2 groups.
RESULTS: The overall mean patient age and stone size values were 5.40 ± 0.51 years and 6.24 ± 0.28 mm, respectively. Regarding the predictive values of these parameters for the success of MET, while stone size and UWT were found to be highly predictive for MET success, patients age, body mass index, stone density, and degree of hydronephrosis had no predictive value on this aspect.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicated that some stone and anatomical factors may be used to predict the success of MET in pediatric ureteral stones in an effective manner. With this approach, unnecessary use of these drugs that may cause a delay in removing the stone will be avoided, and the possible adverse effects of obstruction as well as stone-related clinical symptoms could be minimized.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 35 children receiving MET ureteral stones (<10 mm) were evaluated. Patients were divided into 2 subgroups where MET was successful in 18 children (51.4%) and unsuccessful in 17 children (48.6%). Prior to management, stone size, stone density (in Hounsfield unit), degree of hydronephrosis, and UWT were evaluated with patient demographics and recorded. The possible predictive value of these parameters in success rates and time to stone expulsion were evaluated in a comparative manner between the 2 groups.
RESULTS: The overall mean patient age and stone size values were 5.40 ± 0.51 years and 6.24 ± 0.28 mm, respectively. Regarding the predictive values of these parameters for the success of MET, while stone size and UWT were found to be highly predictive for MET success, patients age, body mass index, stone density, and degree of hydronephrosis had no predictive value on this aspect.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicated that some stone and anatomical factors may be used to predict the success of MET in pediatric ureteral stones in an effective manner. With this approach, unnecessary use of these drugs that may cause a delay in removing the stone will be avoided, and the possible adverse effects of obstruction as well as stone-related clinical symptoms could be minimized.