Success rate and complications of performing elective ureteroscopy in <1 week versus over 1 week from renal colic initiation in ureteral stones larger than 6 mm.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Journal of Research in Medical Sciences Pub Date : 2024-07-11 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.4103/jrms.jrms_43_23
Reza Kazemi, Amir Javid, Amir Hossein Ghandehari, Hanieh Salehi
{"title":"Success rate and complications of performing elective ureteroscopy in <1 week versus over 1 week from renal colic initiation in ureteral stones larger than 6 mm.","authors":"Reza Kazemi, Amir Javid, Amir Hossein Ghandehari, Hanieh Salehi","doi":"10.4103/jrms.jrms_43_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes, success rate, and complications of performing elective ureteroscopy at different times: <1 week from renal colic initiation (early) and more than 1 week from renal colic initiation (late) in patients with ureteral stone larger than 6 mm.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This comparative observational study was conducted on 338 consecutive patients. Patients were evaluated in two groups: patients who underwent ureteroscopy in <1 week (A) and patients who underwent ureteroscopy in more than 1 week (B) from renal colic initiation. Helical unenhanced computed tomography was used to assess the size, location, and hardness of stone for all patients. Operation success was defined as complete clearance of stone with no stone residue (stone free) at 2-week postoperative ultrasonography with no need to further interventions. Operation data were collected using medical records, and postoperative complications were investigated at 2 weeks postoperative follow-up visits.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Group A included 165 patients and Group B included 173 patients. The overall mean stone size was 8.60 ± 1.12 mm: for Group A 9.13 ± 0.94 mm and for Group B 8.10 ± 1.04 mm (<i>P</i> < 0.001). Stone residues were found in 11 patients: 9 in Group A (5.4%) and 2 in Group B (1.1%) (<i>P</i> = 0.026). Nine patients needed repeated ureteroscopy: 8 (4.8%) in Group A and 1 (0.6%) in Group B (<i>P</i> = 0.015). A double-J stent was used for 85 (51.5%) patients in Group A and 66 (38.2%) patients in Group B (<i>P</i> = 0.016). Major intraoperative complications did not happen in any patients. Fifty-three (32.1%) patients in Group A and 28 (16.2%) patients in Group B suffered from postoperative complications (<i>P</i> = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study revealed that performing elective ureteroscopy with an interval of more than 1 week from the onset of renal colic in combination with medical treatments was associated with less need for double-J stent placement, less need for repeated ureteroscopy, and fewer postoperative complications compared to performing elective ureteroscopy in <1 week from the renal colic onset in nonemergent patients with ureteral stone larger than 6 mm. Although the rate of ureteroscopy failure was higher among the patients who underwent ureteroscopy in <1 week from their renal colic initiation, there was no statistically significant relationship between performing ureteroscopy in <1 week and an increased risk for ureteroscopy failure.</p>","PeriodicalId":50062,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in Medical Sciences","volume":"29 ","pages":"27"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11376710/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jrms.jrms_43_23","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes, success rate, and complications of performing elective ureteroscopy at different times: <1 week from renal colic initiation (early) and more than 1 week from renal colic initiation (late) in patients with ureteral stone larger than 6 mm.

Materials and methods: This comparative observational study was conducted on 338 consecutive patients. Patients were evaluated in two groups: patients who underwent ureteroscopy in <1 week (A) and patients who underwent ureteroscopy in more than 1 week (B) from renal colic initiation. Helical unenhanced computed tomography was used to assess the size, location, and hardness of stone for all patients. Operation success was defined as complete clearance of stone with no stone residue (stone free) at 2-week postoperative ultrasonography with no need to further interventions. Operation data were collected using medical records, and postoperative complications were investigated at 2 weeks postoperative follow-up visits.

Results: Group A included 165 patients and Group B included 173 patients. The overall mean stone size was 8.60 ± 1.12 mm: for Group A 9.13 ± 0.94 mm and for Group B 8.10 ± 1.04 mm (P < 0.001). Stone residues were found in 11 patients: 9 in Group A (5.4%) and 2 in Group B (1.1%) (P = 0.026). Nine patients needed repeated ureteroscopy: 8 (4.8%) in Group A and 1 (0.6%) in Group B (P = 0.015). A double-J stent was used for 85 (51.5%) patients in Group A and 66 (38.2%) patients in Group B (P = 0.016). Major intraoperative complications did not happen in any patients. Fifty-three (32.1%) patients in Group A and 28 (16.2%) patients in Group B suffered from postoperative complications (P = 0.001).

Conclusion: Our study revealed that performing elective ureteroscopy with an interval of more than 1 week from the onset of renal colic in combination with medical treatments was associated with less need for double-J stent placement, less need for repeated ureteroscopy, and fewer postoperative complications compared to performing elective ureteroscopy in <1 week from the renal colic onset in nonemergent patients with ureteral stone larger than 6 mm. Although the rate of ureteroscopy failure was higher among the patients who underwent ureteroscopy in <1 week from their renal colic initiation, there was no statistically significant relationship between performing ureteroscopy in <1 week and an increased risk for ureteroscopy failure.

对于大于 6 毫米的输尿管结石,在肾绞痛开始后 1 周内与 1 周以上进行择期输尿管镜检查的成功率和并发症。
研究背景本研究旨在比较在不同时间进行择期输尿管镜检查的结果、成功率和并发症:材料和方法:这项比较观察研究对 338 名连续患者进行了评估。患者分为两组进行评估:A 组包括 165 名患者,B 组包括 165 名患者:A 组包括 165 名患者,B 组包括 173 名患者。结石总平均大小为 8.60 ± 1.12 毫米:A 组为 9.13 ± 0.94 毫米,B 组为 8.10 ± 1.04 毫米(P < 0.001)。11 名患者发现结石残留:A 组 9 人(5.4%),B 组 2 人(1.1%)(P = 0.026)。九名患者需要再次接受输尿管镜检查:A 组 8 人(4.8%),B 组 1 人(0.6%)(P = 0.015)。A 组有 85 人(51.5%)使用了双 J 支架,B 组有 66 人(38.2%)使用了双 J 支架(P = 0.016)。所有患者均未发生重大术中并发症。A组53例(32.1%)和B组28例(16.2%)患者出现术后并发症(P = 0.001):我们的研究表明,在肾绞痛发生后间隔 1 周以上再进行选择性输尿管镜检查并结合药物治疗,与在肾绞痛发生后间隔 1 周以上再进行选择性输尿管镜检查并结合药物治疗相比,更不需要放置双 J 支架,更不需要重复进行输尿管镜检查,术后并发症也更少。
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
Journal of Research in Medical Sciences
Journal of Research in Medical Sciences MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
6.20%
发文量
75
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, a publication of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, is a peer-reviewed online continuous journal with print on demand compilation of issues published. The journal’s full text is available online at http://www.jmsjournal.net. The journal allows free access (Open Access) to its contents and permits authors to self-archive final accepted version of the articles on any OAI-compliant institutional / subject-based repository.
×
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