| Literature DB >> 25887148 |
Aihua Li1, Chengdong Ji2, Hui Wang3, Genqiang Lang4, Honghai Lu5, Sikuan Liu6, Weiwu Li7, Binghui Zhang8, Wei Fang9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The treatment of large volume bladder stones by current equipments continues to be a management problem in both developing and developed countries. AH-1 Stone Removal System (SRS) invented by us is primarily used to crush and retrieve bladder stones. This study evaluated the safety and efficiency of transurethral cystolitholapaxy with SRS for the treatment of bladder stones of variable size.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25887148 PMCID: PMC4343269 DOI: 10.1186/s12894-015-0003-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Urol ISSN: 1471-2490 Impact factor: 2.264
Figure 1AH-1 stone removal system (SRS).
Figure 2The outer sheath with inner sheath and endoscope.
Figure 3Characteristics and functions of the jaw. A. The jaw in endoscope; B. Stone was stabilized with the jaw and lithotripsy was performed with holmium laser; C. Fragments were retrieved using the jaw through outer sheath.
Characteristics of patients
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A1 (<2 cm) | 10 | 0.84 ± 0.30 | 8.78 ± 8.45 | 9 | 44.87 ± 25.74 |
| A2 (<2 cm) | 44 | 1.43 ± 0.24 | 5.12 ± 6.36 | 31 | 56.93 ± 33.38 |
| B (2-2.9 cm) | 34 | 2.34 ± 0.31 | 2.62 ± 3.43 | 20 | 63.75 ± 42.71 |
| C (3-3.9 cm) | 15 | 3.27 ± 0.24 | 1.47 ± 1.20 | 10 | 63.12 ± 28.78 |
| D (≥4 cm) | 9 | 4.82 ± 0.83 | 2.44 ± 3.64 | 4 | 37.78 ± 18.04 |
| Total | 112 | 74 |
Stone size was presented by the biggest in patients with multiple stones. Compared between the four groups, the difference of prostate volume was not statistically significant, P >0.05.
Stone removal time in different stone sizes
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| A1 (<2 cm) | No | 5.10 ± 2.13 | 32.50 ± 14.10 |
| A2 (<2 cm) | Yes | 11.11 ± 11.96 | 35.97 ± 14.92 |
| B (2-2.9 cm) | Yes | 17.30 ± 14.36 | 35.20 ± 10.74 |
| C (3-3.9 cm) | Yes | 20.68 ± 9.04 | 31.70 ± 12.44 |
| D (≥4 cm) | Yes | 64.11 ± 40.14 | 25.00 ± 12.25 |
Compared with Group A1, the difference of stone removal time was statistically significant, P <0.05 in Group B, P <0.001 in Group C and Group D. Compared with Group A2, the difference of stone removal time was statistically significant, P <0.01 in Group B and Group C, and P <0.001 in Group D. Compared with Group B, the difference of stone removal time was statistically significant, P <0.001 in Group D. Compared with Group C, the difference of stone removal time was statistically significant, P <0.01 in Group D. Compared between the four groups, the difference of TURP operating time was not statistically significant, P >0.05.
Stone removal time of patients with single stone
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| A (<2 cm) | 22 | 1.35 ± 0.37 | 5.50 ± 3.92 |
| B (2-2.9 cm) | 21 | 2.38 ± 0.32 | 11.90 ± 9.91 |
| C (3-3.9 cm) | 12 | 3.30 ± 0.29 | 21.92 ± 9.44 |
| D (≥4 cm) | 7 | 4.69 ± 0.86 | 49.29 ± 30.47 |
Compared with Group A, the difference of stone removal time was statistically significant, P <0.01 in Group B, P <0.001 in Group C and Group D. Compared with Group B, the difference was statistically significant, P <0.01 in Group C and P <0.001 in Group D. Compared with Group C, the difference was statistically significant, P <0.02 in Group D.