A comparison of suprapubic percutaneous versus transurethral approach for the treatment of vesical stone in male patients: prospective clinical trial

Q4 Medicine
Wadhah Almarzooq, Salam Yahya, A. Al-Humairi, A. Shubbar
{"title":"A comparison of suprapubic percutaneous versus transurethral approach for the treatment of vesical stone in male patients: prospective clinical trial","authors":"Wadhah Almarzooq, Salam Yahya, A. Al-Humairi, A. Shubbar","doi":"10.4103/MJBL.MJBL_783_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Urolithiasis can affect all parts of the urinary tract (kidneys, ureter, urinary bladder, urethra, and even the prostate). The disease is usually symptomatic; however, a symptomatic disease can occur in some cases; vesical stones account for approximately 5% of urinary tract calculi. Objectives: In the present study, we try to compare two different techniques for endoscopic surgical treatment of vesical stone (transurethral versus percutaneous). Materials and Methods: This work involved 37 male patients with vesical stones; those patients split into two groups, the first treated by transurethral vesicolithotripsy while Group 2 (G2) treated by suprapubic vesicolithotripsy using pneumatic lithoclast system in both groups. Patients in both groups have been compared regarding operative time, stone clearance, postoperative hematuria, hospital stay, and some other parameters. Results: There was no clinical significance regarding the sizes and the number of vesical stones between the two groups of patients. The study showed the operative time was significantly shorter in G2 than in Group (G1); in addition to that postoperative hematuria was little in G2 than in G1. Stone clearance was also significantly higher in G2 than G1. Conclusion: We conclude that the suprapubic approach is better than transurethral approach for the treatment of vesical stones in male patients due to its higher efficacy and shorter operative time.","PeriodicalId":18326,"journal":{"name":"Medical Journal of Babylon","volume":"5 1","pages":"626 - 631"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Journal of Babylon","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/MJBL.MJBL_783_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Urolithiasis can affect all parts of the urinary tract (kidneys, ureter, urinary bladder, urethra, and even the prostate). The disease is usually symptomatic; however, a symptomatic disease can occur in some cases; vesical stones account for approximately 5% of urinary tract calculi. Objectives: In the present study, we try to compare two different techniques for endoscopic surgical treatment of vesical stone (transurethral versus percutaneous). Materials and Methods: This work involved 37 male patients with vesical stones; those patients split into two groups, the first treated by transurethral vesicolithotripsy while Group 2 (G2) treated by suprapubic vesicolithotripsy using pneumatic lithoclast system in both groups. Patients in both groups have been compared regarding operative time, stone clearance, postoperative hematuria, hospital stay, and some other parameters. Results: There was no clinical significance regarding the sizes and the number of vesical stones between the two groups of patients. The study showed the operative time was significantly shorter in G2 than in Group (G1); in addition to that postoperative hematuria was little in G2 than in G1. Stone clearance was also significantly higher in G2 than G1. Conclusion: We conclude that the suprapubic approach is better than transurethral approach for the treatment of vesical stones in male patients due to its higher efficacy and shorter operative time.
男性膀胱结石患者耻骨上经皮途径与经尿道途径治疗的比较:前瞻性临床试验
背景:尿路结石可影响尿路的所有部位(肾脏、输尿管、膀胱、尿道,甚至前列腺)。这种疾病通常无症状,但在某些情况下也会出现无症状疾病;膀胱结石约占尿路结石的 5%。研究目的在本研究中,我们试图比较两种不同的膀胱结石内窥镜手术治疗技术(经尿道与经皮)。材料和方法:37名男性膀胱结石患者被分为两组,第一组采用经尿道膀胱碎石术,第二组(G2)采用耻骨上膀胱碎石术,两组均使用气动碎石系统。两组患者在手术时间、结石清除率、术后血尿、住院时间和其他一些参数方面进行了比较。结果:两组患者膀胱结石的大小和数量没有临床意义。研究显示,G2 组的手术时间明显短于 G1 组;此外,G2 组的术后血尿少于 G1 组。G2 组的结石清除率也明显高于 G1 组。结论我们得出结论,在治疗男性膀胱结石方面,耻骨上入路比经尿道入路效果更好,手术时间更短。
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
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信