泌尿科训练不影响准确大小肾结石碎片的能力。

IF 2 2区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Kelly Lehner, Jayson Kemble, Jamal Alamiri, Aaron Potretzke, Kevin Koo
{"title":"泌尿科训练不影响准确大小肾结石碎片的能力。","authors":"Kelly Lehner, Jayson Kemble, Jamal Alamiri, Aaron Potretzke, Kevin Koo","doi":"10.1007/s00240-025-01780-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Accurate estimation of stone fragment size during ureteroscopy facilitates safe extraction. We aimed to determine whether training experience improves the accuracy of estimating fragment size. Six mock stones (range 1.2-7.4 mm) were placed in a renal model for simulated flexible ureteroscopy. Urology residents and high-volume ureteroscopy surgeons estimated fragment size and extractability through a 12/14-French sheath. Responses were compared among 3 training levels (PGY 1-2, PGY 3-5, and surgeons) and analyzed by objective measures of surgical experience and technical skill. Categorical and continuous variables were analyzed using ANOVA and Pearson correlation, respectively. 16 residents and 6 surgeons were included. Participants underestimated fragment size by 30% overall. As fragment size increased, the discrepancy between estimates and true size also increased. There was no statistical difference in accuracy among training groups and no association with experience or skill. Participants nearly always (98%) correctly identified < 4 mm fragments as extractable; in contrast, participants identified > 4 mm fragments as not extractable only 59% of the time. There was similarly no difference in predicting extraction by training level, experience, or skill. Both novice and experienced surgeons substantially underestimate fragment size during ureteroscopy, which may increase the risk of unsafe extraction. Technologies that enable real-time measurement may improve accuracy, regardless of surgeon experience.</p>","PeriodicalId":23411,"journal":{"name":"Urolithiasis","volume":"53 1","pages":"114"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Urologic training does not impact ability to accurately size kidney stone fragments.\",\"authors\":\"Kelly Lehner, Jayson Kemble, Jamal Alamiri, Aaron Potretzke, Kevin Koo\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00240-025-01780-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Accurate estimation of stone fragment size during ureteroscopy facilitates safe extraction. We aimed to determine whether training experience improves the accuracy of estimating fragment size. Six mock stones (range 1.2-7.4 mm) were placed in a renal model for simulated flexible ureteroscopy. Urology residents and high-volume ureteroscopy surgeons estimated fragment size and extractability through a 12/14-French sheath. Responses were compared among 3 training levels (PGY 1-2, PGY 3-5, and surgeons) and analyzed by objective measures of surgical experience and technical skill. Categorical and continuous variables were analyzed using ANOVA and Pearson correlation, respectively. 16 residents and 6 surgeons were included. Participants underestimated fragment size by 30% overall. As fragment size increased, the discrepancy between estimates and true size also increased. There was no statistical difference in accuracy among training groups and no association with experience or skill. Participants nearly always (98%) correctly identified < 4 mm fragments as extractable; in contrast, participants identified > 4 mm fragments as not extractable only 59% of the time. There was similarly no difference in predicting extraction by training level, experience, or skill. Both novice and experienced surgeons substantially underestimate fragment size during ureteroscopy, which may increase the risk of unsafe extraction. Technologies that enable real-time measurement may improve accuracy, regardless of surgeon experience.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Urolithiasis\",\"volume\":\"53 1\",\"pages\":\"114\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-14\",\"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/s00240-025-01780-7\",\"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/s00240-025-01780-7","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

输尿管镜检查时准确估计结石碎片大小有助于安全取出。我们的目的是确定训练经验是否提高了估计碎片大小的准确性。将6颗模拟结石(范围1.2-7.4 mm)置于肾脏模型中,用于模拟柔性输尿管镜检查。泌尿外科住院医师和大容量输尿管镜外科医生估计碎片大小和通过12/14-French鞘的可提取性。比较3个培训水平(PGY 1-2、PGY 3-5和外科医生)的反应,并通过客观的手术经验和技术技能指标进行分析。分类变量和连续变量分别采用方差分析和Pearson相关分析。住院医师16名,外科医生6名。总的来说,参与者低估了碎片大小的30%。随着碎片大小的增加,估计值与真实大小之间的差异也在增加。不同的训练组在准确性上没有统计学差异,也与经验或技能无关。参与者几乎总是(98%)正确地识别出< 4 mm的碎片是可提取的;相比之下,参与者识别bbb40毫米碎片不可提取的时间只有59%。同样,根据训练水平、经验或技能预测提取也没有差异。新手和经验丰富的外科医生在输尿管镜检查中都大大低估了碎片的大小,这可能会增加不安全取出的风险。无论外科医生的经验如何,实时测量技术都可以提高准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Urologic training does not impact ability to accurately size kidney stone fragments.

Accurate estimation of stone fragment size during ureteroscopy facilitates safe extraction. We aimed to determine whether training experience improves the accuracy of estimating fragment size. Six mock stones (range 1.2-7.4 mm) were placed in a renal model for simulated flexible ureteroscopy. Urology residents and high-volume ureteroscopy surgeons estimated fragment size and extractability through a 12/14-French sheath. Responses were compared among 3 training levels (PGY 1-2, PGY 3-5, and surgeons) and analyzed by objective measures of surgical experience and technical skill. Categorical and continuous variables were analyzed using ANOVA and Pearson correlation, respectively. 16 residents and 6 surgeons were included. Participants underestimated fragment size by 30% overall. As fragment size increased, the discrepancy between estimates and true size also increased. There was no statistical difference in accuracy among training groups and no association with experience or skill. Participants nearly always (98%) correctly identified < 4 mm fragments as extractable; in contrast, participants identified > 4 mm fragments as not extractable only 59% of the time. There was similarly no difference in predicting extraction by training level, experience, or skill. Both novice and experienced surgeons substantially underestimate fragment size during ureteroscopy, which may increase the risk of unsafe extraction. Technologies that enable real-time measurement may improve accuracy, regardless of surgeon experience.

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:604180095
Book学术官方微信