Literature DB >> 21457084

Evaluation of ureteral stent placement after retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for upper ureteral stone: randomized controlled study.

Ahmed Hammady1, Wael Mohamed Gamal, Mohamed Zaki, Mohamed Hussein, Abdelmonem Abuzeid.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the necessity of ureteral stent placement after retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (RLU) for upper ureteral stones more than 1 cm. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between May 2006 and May 2009, 104 RLUs were performed as primary management of large upper ureteral stones. The patients were randomly divided into two groups: In group 1 (52 patients), RLU was performed without stent placement afterward, and in group 2 (52 patients), the stent was placed after RLU. The mean stone size was 16.8 cm in group 1 and 18.2 cm in group 2. The stent in group 2 was placed cystoscopically.
RESULTS: All procedures were performed successfully. The mean operative time was 48 minutes in group 1 vs. 65 minutes in group 2. The mean drainage time was 4.1 days in group 1 vs. 2.3 days in group 2. All the patients were followed up for a period of 6 months with no recorded cases of residual stone or ureteral stricture.
CONCLUSION: RLU for large upper ureteral stones could be considered as a primary line for treatment as regards the economic status in developing countries. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (LU) without stent placement for upper ureteral stones is safe, cost effective, has less operative time, and needs no auxiliary procedures when compared with the use of stent placement after LU, which adds costs and discomfort for the patient.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21457084     DOI: 10.1089/end.2010.0628

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endourol        ISSN: 0892-7790            Impact factor:   2.942


  7 in total

1.  A novel case of laparoscopic ureterolithotomy in a partial duplex ureteric collecting system: can open procedures still be justified in the minimally invasive era?

Authors:  F O'Kelly; P Nicholson; J Brennan; A Carroll; S Skehan; D W Mulvin
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2013-01-30       Impact factor: 1.568

2.  Retroperitoneal laparoendoscopic single-site ureterolithotomy: a comparison with conventional laparoscopic surgery.

Authors:  Xingqiao Wen; Xiaopeng Liu; Huaiqiu Huang; Jieying Wu; Wentao Huang; Songwang Cai; Xiaojuan Li; Chunwei Ye; Baoyi Zhu; Yi Cai; Xin Gao
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2012-01-10       Impact factor: 2.942

3.  Should we place ureteral stents in retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy?: Consideration of surgical techniques and complications.

Authors:  Jae Hyung You; Young Gon Kim; Myung Ki Kim
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2014-08-08

4.  A new and easy technique of double-J stenting after retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: A discussion of other techniques.

Authors:  Jayanta Kumar Das; Gordon M Rangad
Journal:  Urol Ann       Date:  2020-08-10

5.  Laparoscopic Ureterolithotomy.

Authors:  Selçuk Şahin; Bekir Aras; Mithat Ekşi; Nevzat Can Şener; Volkan Tugču
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2016 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.172

6.  The usefulness of flexible cystoscopy for preventing double-J stent malposition after laparoscopic ureterolithotomy.

Authors:  Jae-Yoon Kim; Seok-Ho Kang; Jun Cheon; Jeong-Gu Lee; Je-Jong Kim; Sung-Gu Kang
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2017-06-15       Impact factor: 2.264

7.  A giant ureteral stone in a 32-year-old man: a case report.

Authors:  Mohammad Natami; Alireza Makarem; Faisal Ahmed; Niloofar Dastgheib; Ali-Hossein Zahraei
Journal:  Int Med Case Rep J       Date:  2019-02-18
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.