计算机断层扫描尿路造影显示单下极萼状结石患者盆腔萼状系统解剖学对结石形成的影响

Q3 Medicine
Kapil Adhikari, Niraj Regmi, Karun Devkota, Sapana Koirala
{"title":"计算机断层扫描尿路造影显示单下极萼状结石患者盆腔萼状系统解剖学对结石形成的影响","authors":"Kapil Adhikari, Niraj Regmi, Karun Devkota, Sapana Koirala","doi":"10.33314/jnhrc.v22i01.4330","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To compare various lower pole pelvicalyceal anatomical factors of stone bearing kidney with contralateral normal kidneys and determine whether these factors predispose to stone formation in one kidney.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A descriptive study was done with Computed Tomography of 54 patients with solitary lower pole calculus in one kidney and normal contralateral kidney were included. Various lower pole pelvicalyceal anatomical factors like infundibulopelvic angle, infundibular width, infundibular length and calyceopelvic height of both stone bearing and contralateral kidneys were measured and compared for any differences Results: The mean infundibular width was 5.4±1.9mm on stone bearing kidneys and 5.2±2.05mm on contralateral normal kidneys. The mean infundibular length was 18.9±4.4mm on stone bearing kidneys and 18.8±3.9mm on contralateral normal kidneys. The mean infundibulopelvic angle was 47.9±10.8° on stone bearing kidneys and 47.6±11.2° on contralateral kidneys. The mean calyceopelvic height was 15.7±4.6mm on stone bearing kidneys and 15.5±3.9mm (range 7.5to 23.1mm) on contralateral kidneys. There were no statistically significant differences between stone bearing and contralateral normal kidneys in respect to these pelvicalyceal anatomical factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this study, we found no significant difference in lower pole pelvicalyceal anatomical factors between stone bearing kidneys and contralateral normal kidneys and therefore these factors do not seem to have significant role in stone formation in one kidney compared with the other.</p>","PeriodicalId":16380,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nepal Health Research Council","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impact of Pelvicalyceal System Anatomy on Stone Formation in Patients with Single Lower Pole Calyceal Stone on Computed Tomography Urography.\",\"authors\":\"Kapil Adhikari, Niraj Regmi, Karun Devkota, Sapana Koirala\",\"doi\":\"10.33314/jnhrc.v22i01.4330\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To compare various lower pole pelvicalyceal anatomical factors of stone bearing kidney with contralateral normal kidneys and determine whether these factors predispose to stone formation in one kidney.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A descriptive study was done with Computed Tomography of 54 patients with solitary lower pole calculus in one kidney and normal contralateral kidney were included. Various lower pole pelvicalyceal anatomical factors like infundibulopelvic angle, infundibular width, infundibular length and calyceopelvic height of both stone bearing and contralateral kidneys were measured and compared for any differences Results: The mean infundibular width was 5.4±1.9mm on stone bearing kidneys and 5.2±2.05mm on contralateral normal kidneys. The mean infundibular length was 18.9±4.4mm on stone bearing kidneys and 18.8±3.9mm on contralateral normal kidneys. The mean infundibulopelvic angle was 47.9±10.8° on stone bearing kidneys and 47.6±11.2° on contralateral kidneys. The mean calyceopelvic height was 15.7±4.6mm on stone bearing kidneys and 15.5±3.9mm (range 7.5to 23.1mm) on contralateral kidneys. There were no statistically significant differences between stone bearing and contralateral normal kidneys in respect to these pelvicalyceal anatomical factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this study, we found no significant difference in lower pole pelvicalyceal anatomical factors between stone bearing kidneys and contralateral normal kidneys and therefore these factors do not seem to have significant role in stone formation in one kidney compared with the other.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16380,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Nepal Health Research Council\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Nepal Health Research Council\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33314/jnhrc.v22i01.4330\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nepal Health Research Council","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33314/jnhrc.v22i01.4330","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:比较结石肾脏与对侧正常肾脏的各种下极肾盂-阴囊解剖因素,并确定这些因素是否易导致一个肾脏形成结石:比较患结石肾脏与对侧正常肾脏的各种下极肾盂-阴囊解剖因素,并确定这些因素是否易导致单侧肾脏形成结石:方法: 通过计算机断层扫描对54例单侧肾脏单发下极结石患者和对侧正常肾脏患者进行了描述性研究。测量并比较了患肾和对侧肾脏的各种下极肾盂肾盂解剖因素,如肾小球内角、肾小球内宽、肾小球内长和肾盂肾盏高度,以确定是否存在差异:取石肾脏的平均肾窝宽度为 5.4±1.9 毫米,对侧正常肾脏的平均肾窝宽度为 5.2±2.05 毫米。结石肾脏的平均肾窝长度为(18.9±4.4)mm,对侧正常肾脏的平均肾窝长度为(18.8±3.9)mm。结石肾脏的平均肾盂下角为(47.9±10.8)°,对侧肾脏的平均肾盂下角为(47.6±11.2)°。结石肾脏的平均肾盂高度为15.7±4.6毫米,对侧肾脏的平均肾盂高度为15.5±3.9毫米(范围为7.5至23.1毫米)。在这些肾盂-阴囊解剖因素方面,结石患肾和对侧正常肾脏之间的差异无统计学意义:在这项研究中,我们发现患结石的肾脏和对侧正常肾脏在下极肾盂膀胱解剖因素方面没有明显差异,因此这些因素与其他肾脏相比在结石形成中似乎没有明显作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Impact of Pelvicalyceal System Anatomy on Stone Formation in Patients with Single Lower Pole Calyceal Stone on Computed Tomography Urography.

Background: To compare various lower pole pelvicalyceal anatomical factors of stone bearing kidney with contralateral normal kidneys and determine whether these factors predispose to stone formation in one kidney.

Methods: A descriptive study was done with Computed Tomography of 54 patients with solitary lower pole calculus in one kidney and normal contralateral kidney were included. Various lower pole pelvicalyceal anatomical factors like infundibulopelvic angle, infundibular width, infundibular length and calyceopelvic height of both stone bearing and contralateral kidneys were measured and compared for any differences Results: The mean infundibular width was 5.4±1.9mm on stone bearing kidneys and 5.2±2.05mm on contralateral normal kidneys. The mean infundibular length was 18.9±4.4mm on stone bearing kidneys and 18.8±3.9mm on contralateral normal kidneys. The mean infundibulopelvic angle was 47.9±10.8° on stone bearing kidneys and 47.6±11.2° on contralateral kidneys. The mean calyceopelvic height was 15.7±4.6mm on stone bearing kidneys and 15.5±3.9mm (range 7.5to 23.1mm) on contralateral kidneys. There were no statistically significant differences between stone bearing and contralateral normal kidneys in respect to these pelvicalyceal anatomical factors.

Conclusions: In this study, we found no significant difference in lower pole pelvicalyceal anatomical factors between stone bearing kidneys and contralateral normal kidneys and therefore these factors do not seem to have significant role in stone formation in one kidney compared with the other.

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
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
81
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal publishes articles related to researches done in the field of biomedical sciences related to all the discipline of the medical sciences, medical education, public health, health care management, including ethical and social issues pertaining to health. The journal gives preference to clinically oriented studies over experimental and animal studies. The Journal would publish peer-reviewed original research papers, case reports, systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Editorial, Guest Editorial, Viewpoint and letter to the editor are solicited by the editorial board. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) regarding manuscript submission and processing at JNHRC.
×
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