571评估体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)在COVID-19大流行期间治疗输尿管结石的有效性——一项单一中心的经验

M. Farah, I. Rizvi, R. Fernandes, A. Patel
{"title":"571评估体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)在COVID-19大流行期间治疗输尿管结石的有效性——一项单一中心的经验","authors":"M. Farah, I. Rizvi, R. Fernandes, A. Patel","doi":"10.1093/bjs/znac269.084","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Aim Reliance on ESWL for treating ureteric stone has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. We examined the outcomes for ureteric stones treated with our on-site lithotripter to assess the success rate and determine the variables that could affect the outcome results. Method A retrospective review using electronic records and images of patients who underwent ESWL for ureteric stones (January to December 2020). Univariate and multivariate analysis used to determine stone-free rate predictors (Stone Free rate/SFR: No residual stones on post-ESWL imagining). Results A total of 36 patients underwent ESWL for ureteric stones. Mean age was 58 years (21–90), and mean stone size was 8 mm (5–20). Stones were located in the proximal (67%) or lower ureter (33%). Overall SFR was 64% (67% proximal, 33% distal). 64% of patients required only one session to be stone free, with 60% stone free after two sessions. Stones <10mm had a SFR of 67%, compared to 58% for stone >10 mm. The only statistically significant predictor was stone size (longest dimension, p=0.04). No statistical significance with stone location (P=0.09), skin-to-stone distance (SSD) (P=0.7), stone density (P=0.3) or stone volume (P=0.3). In treatment failure, time to definitive ureteroscopy was 4 weeks. Conclusion Our overall SFR was slightly lower than expected but comparable to available literature. This data highlights the importance of patient selection for ESWL and would be useful in counselling about local success rate. More than half of the patients required only one session for stone clearance and stone size was the only significant predictor for successful ESWL.","PeriodicalId":76612,"journal":{"name":"The British journal of oral surgery","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"571 Evaluating the Effectiveness of Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy (ESWL) for Ureteric Stones During COVID-19 Pandemic - A Single Centre Experience\",\"authors\":\"M. Farah, I. Rizvi, R. Fernandes, A. Patel\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/bjs/znac269.084\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Aim Reliance on ESWL for treating ureteric stone has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. We examined the outcomes for ureteric stones treated with our on-site lithotripter to assess the success rate and determine the variables that could affect the outcome results. Method A retrospective review using electronic records and images of patients who underwent ESWL for ureteric stones (January to December 2020). Univariate and multivariate analysis used to determine stone-free rate predictors (Stone Free rate/SFR: No residual stones on post-ESWL imagining). Results A total of 36 patients underwent ESWL for ureteric stones. Mean age was 58 years (21–90), and mean stone size was 8 mm (5–20). Stones were located in the proximal (67%) or lower ureter (33%). Overall SFR was 64% (67% proximal, 33% distal). 64% of patients required only one session to be stone free, with 60% stone free after two sessions. Stones <10mm had a SFR of 67%, compared to 58% for stone >10 mm. The only statistically significant predictor was stone size (longest dimension, p=0.04). No statistical significance with stone location (P=0.09), skin-to-stone distance (SSD) (P=0.7), stone density (P=0.3) or stone volume (P=0.3). In treatment failure, time to definitive ureteroscopy was 4 weeks. Conclusion Our overall SFR was slightly lower than expected but comparable to available literature. This data highlights the importance of patient selection for ESWL and would be useful in counselling about local success rate. More than half of the patients required only one session for stone clearance and stone size was the only significant predictor for successful ESWL.\",\"PeriodicalId\":76612,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The British journal of oral surgery\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The British journal of oral surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znac269.084\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The British journal of oral surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znac269.084","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

【摘要】目的2019冠状病毒病疫情期间,输尿管结石患者对体外冲击波碎石(ESWL)的依赖有所增加。我们检查了输尿管结石用现场碎石机治疗的结果,以评估成功率并确定可能影响结果的变量。方法回顾性分析2020年1月至12月输尿管结石行体外冲击波碎石(ESWL)治疗患者的电子记录和图像。单因素和多因素分析用于确定无结石率预测因子(无结石率/SFR: eswl后成像无残留结石)。结果36例患者行体外冲击波碎石治疗输尿管结石。平均年龄58岁(21-90岁),平均结石大小8毫米(5-20)。结石位于输尿管近端(67%)或输尿管下部(33%)。总体SFR为64%(近端67%,远端33%)。64%的患者只需要一次治疗就可以消除结石,60%的患者在两次治疗后就可以消除结石。石头10毫米。唯一具有统计学意义的预测因子是结石大小(最长维度,p=0.04)。结石位置(P=0.09)、皮肤与结石距离(SSD) (P=0.7)、结石密度(P=0.3)、结石体积(P=0.3)均无统计学意义。治疗失败时,最终输尿管镜检查时间为4周。结论:我们的总体SFR略低于预期,但与现有文献相当。这一数据强调了病人选择体外冲击波治疗的重要性,并将对当地成功率的咨询有用。超过一半的患者只需要一次手术就可以清除结石,而结石大小是ESWL成功的唯一重要预测因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
571 Evaluating the Effectiveness of Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy (ESWL) for Ureteric Stones During COVID-19 Pandemic - A Single Centre Experience
Abstract Aim Reliance on ESWL for treating ureteric stone has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. We examined the outcomes for ureteric stones treated with our on-site lithotripter to assess the success rate and determine the variables that could affect the outcome results. Method A retrospective review using electronic records and images of patients who underwent ESWL for ureteric stones (January to December 2020). Univariate and multivariate analysis used to determine stone-free rate predictors (Stone Free rate/SFR: No residual stones on post-ESWL imagining). Results A total of 36 patients underwent ESWL for ureteric stones. Mean age was 58 years (21–90), and mean stone size was 8 mm (5–20). Stones were located in the proximal (67%) or lower ureter (33%). Overall SFR was 64% (67% proximal, 33% distal). 64% of patients required only one session to be stone free, with 60% stone free after two sessions. Stones <10mm had a SFR of 67%, compared to 58% for stone >10 mm. The only statistically significant predictor was stone size (longest dimension, p=0.04). No statistical significance with stone location (P=0.09), skin-to-stone distance (SSD) (P=0.7), stone density (P=0.3) or stone volume (P=0.3). In treatment failure, time to definitive ureteroscopy was 4 weeks. Conclusion Our overall SFR was slightly lower than expected but comparable to available literature. This data highlights the importance of patient selection for ESWL and would be useful in counselling about local success rate. More than half of the patients required only one session for stone clearance and stone size was the only significant predictor for successful ESWL.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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