经腹腔镜输尿管碎石术和经皮肾镜碎石术治疗巨大输尿管近端结石的倾向得分匹配比较及长期随访。

IF 2 2区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Shijun Zhang, Haomin Ren, Xiang Li, Qingzhi Long, Dapeng Wu, Wei Chen
{"title":"经腹腔镜输尿管碎石术和经皮肾镜碎石术治疗巨大输尿管近端结石的倾向得分匹配比较及长期随访。","authors":"Shijun Zhang, Haomin Ren, Xiang Li, Qingzhi Long, Dapeng Wu, Wei Chen","doi":"10.1007/s00240-024-01609-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Impacted proximal ureteral stones (IPUS) present challenging clinical scenarios due to their persistent nature and associated complications. While ureterorenoscopy (URS) lithotripsy is recommended as the primary treatment, controversies exist regarding the optimal management of such stones. In this retrospective analysis, we compared the operative outcomes and long-term results of transperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (LU) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for IPUS larger than 15 mm. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to mitigate potential selection biases. Following PSM, 83 patients in each cohort exhibited comparable baseline characteristics. LU demonstrated a superior surgical success rate (100% vs. 96.4%, p = 0.244) and significantly lower perioperative hemoglobin decline (0.6 ± 0.4 g/dL vs. 1.5 ± 0.7 g/dL, p = 0.036) compared to PCNL. Additionally, LU exhibited a higher stone-free rate after 2 months (100% vs. 91.6%, p = 0.043), but a longer duration of catheterization (7.4 ± 1.2 days vs. 3.5 ± 2.2 days vs., p = 0.011). Conversely, PCNL was associated with a higher incidence of total complications (21.7% vs. 9.6%, p = 0.033) and stone recurrence during a mean period of 40-month follow-up (20.5% vs. 8.4%, p = 0.027). Transperitoneal LU and PCNL represent effective interventions for managing IPUS exceeding 15 mm. Notably, LU emerges as a preferable option over PCNL, offering superior stone clearance rates, reduced perioperative complications, and lower recurrence rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":23411,"journal":{"name":"Urolithiasis","volume":"52 1","pages":"109"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Propensity score matched comparison of transperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for management of large impacted proximal ureteral stones with long-term follow-up.\",\"authors\":\"Shijun Zhang, Haomin Ren, Xiang Li, Qingzhi Long, Dapeng Wu, Wei Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00240-024-01609-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Impacted proximal ureteral stones (IPUS) present challenging clinical scenarios due to their persistent nature and associated complications. While ureterorenoscopy (URS) lithotripsy is recommended as the primary treatment, controversies exist regarding the optimal management of such stones. In this retrospective analysis, we compared the operative outcomes and long-term results of transperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (LU) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for IPUS larger than 15 mm. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to mitigate potential selection biases. Following PSM, 83 patients in each cohort exhibited comparable baseline characteristics. LU demonstrated a superior surgical success rate (100% vs. 96.4%, p = 0.244) and significantly lower perioperative hemoglobin decline (0.6 ± 0.4 g/dL vs. 1.5 ± 0.7 g/dL, p = 0.036) compared to PCNL. Additionally, LU exhibited a higher stone-free rate after 2 months (100% vs. 91.6%, p = 0.043), but a longer duration of catheterization (7.4 ± 1.2 days vs. 3.5 ± 2.2 days vs., p = 0.011). Conversely, PCNL was associated with a higher incidence of total complications (21.7% vs. 9.6%, p = 0.033) and stone recurrence during a mean period of 40-month follow-up (20.5% vs. 8.4%, p = 0.027). Transperitoneal LU and PCNL represent effective interventions for managing IPUS exceeding 15 mm. Notably, LU emerges as a preferable option over PCNL, offering superior stone clearance rates, reduced perioperative complications, and lower recurrence rates.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Urolithiasis\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"109\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Urolithiasis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-024-01609-9\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urolithiasis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-024-01609-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

冲击性输尿管近端结石(IPUS)由于其顽固性和相关并发症,在临床上具有挑战性。虽然输尿管肾镜(URS)碎石术被推荐为主要治疗方法,但关于此类结石的最佳治疗方法仍存在争议。在这项回顾性分析中,我们比较了经腹腔镜输尿管碎石术(LU)和经皮肾镜碎石术(PCNL)治疗大于 15 毫米的 IPUS 的手术效果和长期结果。为减少潜在的选择偏差,采用了倾向评分匹配法(PSM)。经过倾向评分匹配后,每个队列中有 83 名患者的基线特征具有可比性。与 PCNL 相比,LU 的手术成功率更高(100% vs. 96.4%,p = 0.244),围手术期血红蛋白下降率明显更低(0.6 ± 0.4 g/dL vs. 1.5 ± 0.7 g/dL,p = 0.036)。此外,LU 在 2 个月后的无结石率更高(100% vs. 91.6%,p = 0.043),但导管插入时间更长(7.4 ± 1.2 天 vs. 3.5 ± 2.2 天,p = 0.011)。相反,PCNL 的总并发症发生率更高(21.7% 对 9.6%,p = 0.033),在平均 40 个月的随访期间结石复发率更高(20.5% 对 8.4%,p = 0.027)。经腹腔镜 LU 和 PCNL 是治疗超过 15 毫米的 IPUS 的有效干预方法。值得注意的是,与 PCNL 相比,腹腔镜 LU 是一种更可取的选择,因为它具有更高的结石清除率、更低的围手术期并发症和更低的复发率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Propensity score matched comparison of transperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for management of large impacted proximal ureteral stones with long-term follow-up.

Impacted proximal ureteral stones (IPUS) present challenging clinical scenarios due to their persistent nature and associated complications. While ureterorenoscopy (URS) lithotripsy is recommended as the primary treatment, controversies exist regarding the optimal management of such stones. In this retrospective analysis, we compared the operative outcomes and long-term results of transperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (LU) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for IPUS larger than 15 mm. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to mitigate potential selection biases. Following PSM, 83 patients in each cohort exhibited comparable baseline characteristics. LU demonstrated a superior surgical success rate (100% vs. 96.4%, p = 0.244) and significantly lower perioperative hemoglobin decline (0.6 ± 0.4 g/dL vs. 1.5 ± 0.7 g/dL, p = 0.036) compared to PCNL. Additionally, LU exhibited a higher stone-free rate after 2 months (100% vs. 91.6%, p = 0.043), but a longer duration of catheterization (7.4 ± 1.2 days vs. 3.5 ± 2.2 days vs., p = 0.011). Conversely, PCNL was associated with a higher incidence of total complications (21.7% vs. 9.6%, p = 0.033) and stone recurrence during a mean period of 40-month follow-up (20.5% vs. 8.4%, p = 0.027). Transperitoneal LU and PCNL represent effective interventions for managing IPUS exceeding 15 mm. Notably, LU emerges as a preferable option over PCNL, offering superior stone clearance rates, reduced perioperative complications, and lower recurrence rates.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Urolithiasis
Urolithiasis UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
6.50%
发文量
74
期刊介绍: Official Journal of the International Urolithiasis Society The journal aims to publish original articles in the fields of clinical and experimental investigation only within the sphere of urolithiasis and its related areas of research. The journal covers all aspects of urolithiasis research including the diagnosis, epidemiology, pathogenesis, genetics, clinical biochemistry, open and non-invasive surgical intervention, nephrological investigation, chemistry and prophylaxis of the disorder. The Editor welcomes contributions on topics of interest to urologists, nephrologists, radiologists, clinical biochemists, epidemiologists, nutritionists, basic scientists and nurses working in that field. Contributions may be submitted as full-length articles or as rapid communications in the form of Letters to the Editor. Articles should be original and should contain important new findings from carefully conducted studies designed to produce statistically significant data. Please note that we no longer publish articles classified as Case Reports. Editorials and review articles may be published by invitation from the Editorial Board. All submissions are peer-reviewed. Through an electronic system for the submission and review of manuscripts, the Editor and Associate Editors aim to make publication accessible as quickly as possible to a large number of readers throughout the world.
×
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