Literature DB >> 25361706

Flexible ureterorenoscopy versus semirigid ureteroscopy for the treatment of proximal ureteral stones: a retrospective comparative analysis of 124 patients.

Mert Ali Karadag1, Aslan Demir, Kursat Cecen, Murat Bagcioglu, Ramazan Kocaaslan, Fatih Altunrende.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate and compare the stone clearence and complication rates of flexible ureteroscopy (URS) with semirigid URS in patients having proximal ureteral stones.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data of 124 patients with proximal ureteral stones who underwent semirigid or flexible ureterorenoscopic lithotripsy between March 2008 and December 2012 were retrospectively investigated. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to the operation types. Group 1 included 63 patients who were treated with semirigid URS and group 2 was consisted from 61 patients who underwent flexible URS. Each group was compared in terms of stone diameter, successful access to the stone, operation time, reoperation rates, stone free status at postoperative 1st and 3rd month and complications.
RESULTS: Successful access was achieved in 48/63 (76%) of the cases in group 1 and 57/61 (93%) of the patients in group 2 (P < .05). Initial stone free status was 63.4% (40/63) and 86.8% (53/61) in groups 1 and 2, respectively (P < .05). Third month radiologic investigations revelaed a stone free rate of 77.7% (49/57) in group 1 and 93.4% (57/61) in group 2 (P < .05). Reoperation was required in 20.6% (13/63) of cases in group 1 and this value was only 6% (4/61) in group 2 (P < .05). There was not any statistically significant difference between 2 groups in terms of complication rates (P > .05).
CONCLUSION: Flexible URS is a favorable option for patients having proximal ureteral stones with higher stone free rate; on the other hand semirigid URS seems a less successful alternative for treatment of proximal ureteral stones.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25361706

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urol J        ISSN: 1735-1308            Impact factor:   1.510


  10 in total

1.  Comparison of flexible ureteroscopy and micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy in terms of cost-effectiveness: analysis of 111 procedures.

Authors:  Murat Bagcioglu; Aslan Demir; Hasan Sulhan; Mert Ali Karadag; Mehmet Uslu; Umit Yener Tekdogan
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2015-10-16       Impact factor: 3.436

2.  Impact of case volume per year on flexible Ureteroscopy practice: an internet based survey.

Authors:  Omar Alhunaidi; Abdulrahman A Ahmad; Ahmed R El-Nahas; Bader Akroof; Ali Alamiri; Feras Al-Ajrawi; Abdullatif Al-Terki; Mohamed El-Shazly
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2019-12-18       Impact factor: 2.264

3.  In situ Management of Large Upper Ureteric Calculus by Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in the Era of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery.

Authors:  Sanjay Prakash Jayaprakash; Mathisekaran Thangarasu; Nitesh Jain; Sandeep Bafna; Rajesh Paul
Journal:  Res Rep Urol       Date:  2020-12-10

4.  Cost-effectiveness of using stone cone, balloon dilator, stone basket, and entrapment device in ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy for ureteric stones.

Authors:  Kürşat Çeçen
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 1.671

5.  Pain control using pethidine in combination with diazepam compared to diclofenac in combination with hyoscine-n-butyl bromide: in patients undergoing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.

Authors:  Aslan Demir; Kursat Cecen; Mert Ali Karadag; Mehmet Uslu; Omer Erkam Arslan
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2015-05-04

6.  Flexible Ureteroscopy Can Be More Efficacious in the Treatment of Proximal Ureteral Stones in Select Patients.

Authors:  Erdal Alkan; Ali Sarıbacak; Ahmet Oguz Ozkanli; Mehmet Murad Basar; Oguz Acar; Mevlana Derya Balbay
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2015-11-04

7.  Retrospective comparative study of rigid and flexible ureteroscopy for treatment of proximal ureteral stones.

Authors:  Ehab Mohamad Galal; Ahmad Zaki Anwar; Tarek Khalaf Fath El-Bab; Amr Mohamad Abdelhamid
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2016 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.541

8.  A stone pushed back to the collecting system - long therapeutic path in centers with limited access to flexible instruments.

Authors:  Ewa Bres-Niewada; Bartosz Dybowski; Piotr Zapała; Sławomir Poletajew; Nina Miązek-Zapała; Irmina Michałek; Piotr Radziszewski
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2018-06-12

Review 9.  Retrograde intrarenal surgery: An expanding role in treatment of urolithiasis.

Authors:  María Rodríguez-Monsalve Herrero; Steeve Doizi; Etienne Xavier Keller; Vincent De Coninck; Olivier Traxer
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2018-06-22

10.  Primary versus deferred ureteroscopy for management of calculus anuria: a prospective randomized study.

Authors:  Ahmad A Elderwy; Mohamed Gadelmoula; Mohammed A Elgammal; Diaa A Hameed; Hosny M Behnsawy; Mahmoud M Osman; Adel Kurkar
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2018-12-27
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.