Analysis of the effectiveness and safety of 7.5 Fr ultra-thin flexible ureteroscope combined with a tip-flexible suctioning ureteral access sheath for the treatment of kidney stones.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Haiyang Hu, Mao Qin, Longwei Yang, Hongyu Hu, Guodong Qin, Ming Qiu, Yu Gao, Jianguo Dou, Tingjia Wu, Pinghua Long, Wei Zhang
{"title":"Analysis of the effectiveness and safety of 7.5 Fr ultra-thin flexible ureteroscope combined with a tip-flexible suctioning ureteral access sheath for the treatment of kidney stones.","authors":"Haiyang Hu, Mao Qin, Longwei Yang, Hongyu Hu, Guodong Qin, Ming Qiu, Yu Gao, Jianguo Dou, Tingjia Wu, Pinghua Long, Wei Zhang","doi":"10.1007/s11255-024-04269-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the efficacy and safety of using a 7.5 Fr flexible ureteroscope (f-URS) with tip-flexible suctioning ureteral access sheath (TFS-UAS) versus a 9.2 Fr f-URS with traditional ureteral access sheath (T-UAS) in the treatment of kidney stones.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted on 205 patients with kidney stones measuring 1.0-2.0 cm treated with 7.5 Fr and 9.2 Fr f-URS in the Urology Department of The Affiliated Dazu Hospital of Chongqing Medical University from November 2022 to November 2023. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. Among them, 78 patients were selected to use the 7.5 Fr f-URS, which was designated as the GroupA. The remaining 127 patients were selected to use the 9.2 Fr f-URS, which served as the GroupB. The study compared the operation duration, lithotripsy duration, surgical success rate, immediate postoperative stone-free rate (SFR), 1-month postoperative SFR, and the incidence rate of postoperative complications between the two patient groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In terms of demographic characteristics, the size of calculi, surgical success rate, and 1-month postoperative SFR, there was no statistically significant difference between GroupA and GroupB. However, GroupA demonstrated superior performance compared to GroupB in operation duration (48 (40.55) min vs 74 (56.94) min), lithotripsy duration (35 (27.43) min vs 59 (42.78) min), and immediate postoperative SFR (53.52% (38/71) vs 29.41% (35/119)), with statistically significant differences observed (P < 0.05). In terms of complication occurrence, GroupA reported 10 cases of minor (Grade 1) complications, whereas GroupB had 32 cases of minor (Grade 1) complications and 7 cases of severe complications (including 2 cases of Grade 3 and 5 cases of Grade 4). The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The GroupA reported significantly fewer cases of postoperative fever (4) and analgesic treatment (3) compared to GroupB, which had 18 fever cases and 19 analgesic cases (P < 0.05).The GroupA did not experience any cases of septicemia or steinstrasse. Conversely, the GroupB had 5 cases of septicemia and 3 cases of steinstrasse, including 2 patients who underwent reoperation. Both groups also reported cases of ureteral mucosal rupture (5 in GroupA, 10 in GroupB), but these differences were not statistically significant (P > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared with 9.2 Fr f-URS combined with T-UAS, the use of 7.5 Fr f-URS with TFS-UAS in the treatment of kidney stones has higher lithotripsy efficiency and lower complication rate. This combination is safe and effective in the treatment of kidney stones.</p>","PeriodicalId":14454,"journal":{"name":"International Urology and Nephrology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Urology and Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-024-04269-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of using a 7.5 Fr flexible ureteroscope (f-URS) with tip-flexible suctioning ureteral access sheath (TFS-UAS) versus a 9.2 Fr f-URS with traditional ureteral access sheath (T-UAS) in the treatment of kidney stones.

Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 205 patients with kidney stones measuring 1.0-2.0 cm treated with 7.5 Fr and 9.2 Fr f-URS in the Urology Department of The Affiliated Dazu Hospital of Chongqing Medical University from November 2022 to November 2023. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. Among them, 78 patients were selected to use the 7.5 Fr f-URS, which was designated as the GroupA. The remaining 127 patients were selected to use the 9.2 Fr f-URS, which served as the GroupB. The study compared the operation duration, lithotripsy duration, surgical success rate, immediate postoperative stone-free rate (SFR), 1-month postoperative SFR, and the incidence rate of postoperative complications between the two patient groups.

Results: In terms of demographic characteristics, the size of calculi, surgical success rate, and 1-month postoperative SFR, there was no statistically significant difference between GroupA and GroupB. However, GroupA demonstrated superior performance compared to GroupB in operation duration (48 (40.55) min vs 74 (56.94) min), lithotripsy duration (35 (27.43) min vs 59 (42.78) min), and immediate postoperative SFR (53.52% (38/71) vs 29.41% (35/119)), with statistically significant differences observed (P < 0.05). In terms of complication occurrence, GroupA reported 10 cases of minor (Grade 1) complications, whereas GroupB had 32 cases of minor (Grade 1) complications and 7 cases of severe complications (including 2 cases of Grade 3 and 5 cases of Grade 4). The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The GroupA reported significantly fewer cases of postoperative fever (4) and analgesic treatment (3) compared to GroupB, which had 18 fever cases and 19 analgesic cases (P < 0.05).The GroupA did not experience any cases of septicemia or steinstrasse. Conversely, the GroupB had 5 cases of septicemia and 3 cases of steinstrasse, including 2 patients who underwent reoperation. Both groups also reported cases of ureteral mucosal rupture (5 in GroupA, 10 in GroupB), but these differences were not statistically significant (P > 0.05).

Conclusion: Compared with 9.2 Fr f-URS combined with T-UAS, the use of 7.5 Fr f-URS with TFS-UAS in the treatment of kidney stones has higher lithotripsy efficiency and lower complication rate. This combination is safe and effective in the treatment of kidney stones.

7.5 Fr 超薄柔性输尿管镜与尖端柔性抽吸输尿管通路鞘相结合治疗肾结石的有效性和安全性分析。
目的比较使用 7.5 Fr 柔性输尿管镜(f-URS)和尖端柔性吸引输尿管入路鞘(TFS-UAS)与使用 9.2 Fr 柔性输尿管镜和传统输尿管入路鞘(T-UAS)治疗肾结石的有效性和安全性:2022年11月至2023年11月,重庆医科大学附属大足医院泌尿外科对205例1.0-2.0厘米肾结石患者进行了回顾性分析。患者被随机分为两组。其中,78 名患者被选中使用 7.5 Fr f-URS,被指定为 A 组。其余 127 名患者被选中使用 9.2 Fr f-URS,即 B 组。研究比较了两组患者的手术时间、碎石时间、手术成功率、术后即刻无石率(SFR)、术后 1 个月无石率以及术后并发症的发生率:结果:在人口统计学特征、结石大小、手术成功率和术后 1 个月无结石率方面,A 组和 B 组之间没有显著差异。然而,与 B 组相比,A 组在手术时间(48 (40.55) 分钟 vs 74 (56.94) 分钟)、碎石时间(35 (27.43) 分钟 vs 59 (42.78) 分钟)和术后即刻 SFR(53.52% (38/71) vs 29.41% (35/119))方面表现更佳,差异有统计学意义(P 0.05):结论:与 9.2 Fr f-URS 联合 T-UAS 相比,使用 7.5 Fr f-URS 联合 TFS-UAS 治疗肾结石具有更高的碎石效率和更低的并发症发生率。这种组合治疗肾结石安全有效。
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
International Urology and Nephrology
International Urology and Nephrology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
329
审稿时长
1.7 months
期刊介绍: International Urology and Nephrology publishes original papers on a broad range of topics in urology, nephrology and andrology. The journal integrates papers originating from clinical practice.
×
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