Systematic approach in the evaluation of ureteroscopic complications.

S. Kotov, A. Nemenov, R. A. Perov, N. M. Sokolov
{"title":"Systematic approach in the evaluation of ureteroscopic complications.","authors":"S. Kotov, A. Nemenov, R. A. Perov, N. M. Sokolov","doi":"10.29188/2222-8543-2022-15-2-32-37","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. Currently, ureteroscopy has become the method of choice for the treatment of patients with ureter stone location in lower third and middle third. Regardless of the fact that ureteroscopy is an endoscopic, minimally invasive intervention, it is associated with intraoperative complications. Purpose. The main objective of this literature review is to objectify the existing scales of ureter injury, demonstrate evolutionary changes from simple to more detailed, evaluate their advantages and disadvantages, and select the optimal and reproducible tool for assessing postureteroscopic complications. Materials and methods. In this literature review, we used research materials on existing scales of ureter injury published in the databases PubMed, the scientific electronic library of Russia (eLibrary), Scopus, EMBASE, websites of professional associations. Such keywords were used for searching: «postureteroscopic complications», «intraoperative complications of ureteroscopy», «ureteral injuries». This review focuses on the currently existing scales that assess ureteral injury, which can be universal and used in everyday practice. After a detailed check of the reliability of sources, the impact factors of journals and the sequence of presentation of the material, 28 sources were selected directly for citation. Results. According to literature review, historical and present-day knowledge of using postureteroscopic lesion scales in various surgical centers are presented here. Most of scales are focus on disruption of anatomical continuity of the ureter or on complications that develop during the implementation of surgical treatment, which are not specific for this procedure. However, the most detailed description of postureteroscopic complications makes it possible to distinguish between «complicated» and «uncomplicated» ureteroscopy. Conclusion. Thus, PULS scoring system is a standardized and easily reproducible tool in the evaluation of postureteroscopic complications. The emergence of new scales only emphasizes the importance and need for additional prospective and multicenter studies.","PeriodicalId":123040,"journal":{"name":"Experimental and Сlinical Urology","volume":"76 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Experimental and Сlinical Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29188/2222-8543-2022-15-2-32-37","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction. Currently, ureteroscopy has become the method of choice for the treatment of patients with ureter stone location in lower third and middle third. Regardless of the fact that ureteroscopy is an endoscopic, minimally invasive intervention, it is associated with intraoperative complications. Purpose. The main objective of this literature review is to objectify the existing scales of ureter injury, demonstrate evolutionary changes from simple to more detailed, evaluate their advantages and disadvantages, and select the optimal and reproducible tool for assessing postureteroscopic complications. Materials and methods. In this literature review, we used research materials on existing scales of ureter injury published in the databases PubMed, the scientific electronic library of Russia (eLibrary), Scopus, EMBASE, websites of professional associations. Such keywords were used for searching: «postureteroscopic complications», «intraoperative complications of ureteroscopy», «ureteral injuries». This review focuses on the currently existing scales that assess ureteral injury, which can be universal and used in everyday practice. After a detailed check of the reliability of sources, the impact factors of journals and the sequence of presentation of the material, 28 sources were selected directly for citation. Results. According to literature review, historical and present-day knowledge of using postureteroscopic lesion scales in various surgical centers are presented here. Most of scales are focus on disruption of anatomical continuity of the ureter or on complications that develop during the implementation of surgical treatment, which are not specific for this procedure. However, the most detailed description of postureteroscopic complications makes it possible to distinguish between «complicated» and «uncomplicated» ureteroscopy. Conclusion. Thus, PULS scoring system is a standardized and easily reproducible tool in the evaluation of postureteroscopic complications. The emergence of new scales only emphasizes the importance and need for additional prospective and multicenter studies.
输尿管镜并发症的系统评价方法。
介绍。目前输尿管镜已成为输尿管结石位于下三分之一和中三分之一的患者治疗的首选方法。尽管输尿管镜检查是一种内镜下的微创干预,但它与术中并发症有关。目的。本文献综述的主要目的是客观化输尿管损伤的现有尺度,展示从简单到详细的进化变化,评估其优缺点,选择最佳的、可重复的工具来评估输尿管镜后并发症。材料和方法。在本文献综述中,我们使用了PubMed、俄罗斯科学电子图书馆(library)、Scopus、EMBASE、专业协会网站上发表的关于输尿管损伤现有尺度的研究资料。搜索关键词为:“输尿管镜术后并发症”、“输尿管镜术中并发症”、“输尿管损伤”。这篇综述的重点是目前评估输尿管损伤的量表,这些量表可以在日常实践中普遍使用。在详细检查了来源的可靠性、期刊的影响因子和材料的呈现顺序后,直接选择了28个来源进行引用。结果。根据文献回顾,历史和现在的知识,使用在不同的外科中心的后宫镜病变量表。大多数的尺度集中在输尿管解剖连续性的破坏或在实施手术治疗过程中发生的并发症,这不是该手术所特有的。然而,最详细的输尿管镜并发症描述使得区分“复杂”和“非复杂”输尿管镜成为可能。结论。因此,PULS评分系统是一种标准化且易于复制的评估腹腔镜术后并发症的工具。新量表的出现只强调了额外的前瞻性和多中心研究的重要性和必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信