Muhammet Arslan, Halil S Aslan, Kadir H Alver, Mahmut Demirci
{"title":"经皮前行双 J 型输尿管支架置入术的比较:第一手与肾造口术途径的比较。","authors":"Muhammet Arslan, Halil S Aslan, Kadir H Alver, Mahmut Demirci","doi":"10.1093/bjr/tqae143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to conduct a comparative analysis of procedural efficacy, safety, and patient outcomes between 2 distinct approaches for percutaneous antegrade double-J ureteral stent (DJS) insertion: the first-hand approach and via a nephrostomy route.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Electronic records of patients undergoing percutaneous antegrade ureteral DJS placement from January 2016 to 2023 were reviewed. Patients were categorized into 2 groups based on stent placement technique: the first-hand group, involving a single-stage approach without prior percutaneous nephrostomy catheter insertion, and the nephrostomy group, where stent placement occurred through a percutaneous nephrostomy tube. Clinical data, including patient demographics, primary diagnoses, procedural details, complication rates, stent placement success, and post-procedural outcomes, were collected and analysed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both approaches demonstrated high technical success rates (93.1%). However, the nephrostomy route group exhibited a comparatively higher fluoroscopy exposure rate (8.2 min) than the first-hand group (6.8 min). Moreover, the complication risk increased by 3.08 times in patients treated with the nephrostomy method (P = .047). Notably, in cases of urinary malignancies, the preference was for placing DJS via nephrostomy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The first-hand approach should be prioritized as the initial choice in suitable cases owing to its reduced fluoroscopy time, lower complication rate, and the single-stage nature of the procedure.</p><p><strong>Advances in knowledge: </strong>With the exception of cases necessitating urgent drainage, such as post-renal acute renal failure and urosepsis, the first-hand method is the primary approach for inserting DJS. This is primarily due to the significantly shorter radiation time and the single-stage nature of the procedure.</p>","PeriodicalId":9306,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Radiology","volume":" ","pages":"1683-1689"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11417350/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of percutaneous antegrade double-J ureteral stent placement: first-hand vs. nephrostomy route approaches.\",\"authors\":\"Muhammet Arslan, Halil S Aslan, Kadir H Alver, Mahmut Demirci\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/bjr/tqae143\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to conduct a comparative analysis of procedural efficacy, safety, and patient outcomes between 2 distinct approaches for percutaneous antegrade double-J ureteral stent (DJS) insertion: the first-hand approach and via a nephrostomy route.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Electronic records of patients undergoing percutaneous antegrade ureteral DJS placement from January 2016 to 2023 were reviewed. Patients were categorized into 2 groups based on stent placement technique: the first-hand group, involving a single-stage approach without prior percutaneous nephrostomy catheter insertion, and the nephrostomy group, where stent placement occurred through a percutaneous nephrostomy tube. Clinical data, including patient demographics, primary diagnoses, procedural details, complication rates, stent placement success, and post-procedural outcomes, were collected and analysed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both approaches demonstrated high technical success rates (93.1%). However, the nephrostomy route group exhibited a comparatively higher fluoroscopy exposure rate (8.2 min) than the first-hand group (6.8 min). Moreover, the complication risk increased by 3.08 times in patients treated with the nephrostomy method (P = .047). Notably, in cases of urinary malignancies, the preference was for placing DJS via nephrostomy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The first-hand approach should be prioritized as the initial choice in suitable cases owing to its reduced fluoroscopy time, lower complication rate, and the single-stage nature of the procedure.</p><p><strong>Advances in knowledge: </strong>With the exception of cases necessitating urgent drainage, such as post-renal acute renal failure and urosepsis, the first-hand method is the primary approach for inserting DJS. This is primarily due to the significantly shorter radiation time and the single-stage nature of the procedure.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9306,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Radiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1683-1689\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11417350/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjr/tqae143\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjr/tqae143","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of percutaneous antegrade double-J ureteral stent placement: first-hand vs. nephrostomy route approaches.
Objective: This study aimed to conduct a comparative analysis of procedural efficacy, safety, and patient outcomes between 2 distinct approaches for percutaneous antegrade double-J ureteral stent (DJS) insertion: the first-hand approach and via a nephrostomy route.
Methods: Electronic records of patients undergoing percutaneous antegrade ureteral DJS placement from January 2016 to 2023 were reviewed. Patients were categorized into 2 groups based on stent placement technique: the first-hand group, involving a single-stage approach without prior percutaneous nephrostomy catheter insertion, and the nephrostomy group, where stent placement occurred through a percutaneous nephrostomy tube. Clinical data, including patient demographics, primary diagnoses, procedural details, complication rates, stent placement success, and post-procedural outcomes, were collected and analysed.
Results: Both approaches demonstrated high technical success rates (93.1%). However, the nephrostomy route group exhibited a comparatively higher fluoroscopy exposure rate (8.2 min) than the first-hand group (6.8 min). Moreover, the complication risk increased by 3.08 times in patients treated with the nephrostomy method (P = .047). Notably, in cases of urinary malignancies, the preference was for placing DJS via nephrostomy.
Conclusion: The first-hand approach should be prioritized as the initial choice in suitable cases owing to its reduced fluoroscopy time, lower complication rate, and the single-stage nature of the procedure.
Advances in knowledge: With the exception of cases necessitating urgent drainage, such as post-renal acute renal failure and urosepsis, the first-hand method is the primary approach for inserting DJS. This is primarily due to the significantly shorter radiation time and the single-stage nature of the procedure.
期刊介绍:
BJR is the international research journal of the British Institute of Radiology and is the oldest scientific journal in the field of radiology and related sciences.
Dating back to 1896, BJR’s history is radiology’s history, and the journal has featured some landmark papers such as the first description of Computed Tomography "Computerized transverse axial tomography" by Godfrey Hounsfield in 1973. A valuable historical resource, the complete BJR archive has been digitized from 1896.
Quick Facts:
- 2015 Impact Factor – 1.840
- Receipt to first decision – average of 6 weeks
- Acceptance to online publication – average of 3 weeks
- ISSN: 0007-1285
- eISSN: 1748-880X
Open Access option