Zobrazení zdroje stránky Coxkusk6142

To compare a modified technique using the Dormia basket vs Stone Cone for stone entrapment to avoid proximal stone migration during ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy of ureteric stones.<br /><br /> Our study included all patients with ureteric stones of &lt;15 mm who underwent ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy from January 2015 to September 2018. The study had two arms that were conducted over two consecutive periods; the first included 72 patients in whom we used the Stone Cone (Group 1) and the second included 86 patients in whom we started to use a Dormia basket with a modification (Group 2) to guard against proximal stone migration.<br /><br /> Both groups were comparable for gender, age, and stone characteristics. Lower ureteric stones were the most prevalent as they represented 62.5% and 60.5% in groups 1 and 2, respectively; while upper ureteric stones were respectively found in 16.7% and 17.4%. Chemical stone analysis revealed that calcium oxalate stones were most predominant accounting for 51.3% and 51.1% in groupchnique compared favourably with the Stone Cone to guard against stone retropulsion during ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy. Our modification to the basket was found to be feasible, efficient, safe, reproducible and cost-effective in preventing proximal stone migration. This procedure is particularly suitable in cost-limited environments.<br /><br /> To presents a novel clinically oriented system to report stone attenuation on non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) using colour-coded density-gradients stone mapping and its clinical applications.<br /><br /> This study was performed on 50 patients with 63 stones. All patients had a recent history of failed shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) or failed dissolution therapy by alkalinisation of urine for radiolucent stones. A multi-detector NCCT examination of the abdomen and pelvis was performed in all patients. The stones were isolated and displayed in 'Volume Rendering Technique' using four-colour encoding.<br /><br /> Eight patients with failed dissolution therapy for radiolucent stones showed an outer layer of &gt;500 Hounsfield units (HU) or a heterogeneous composition. A total of 42 patients with failed SWL had mean attenuations of &lt;1000 HU on NCCT. Subsequent colour-coded stone mapping showed a dense core in all stones (&gt;1000 HU) that failed to be clearly demonstrated by the mean HU alone.<br /><br /> The initial use of a colour-coded density-gradients stone mapping reporting system for stone density on NCCT is useful for explaining failure of SWL or failure of dissolution therapy for radiolucent stones in selected cases.<br /><br /> HU Hounsfield units; MSD mean stone density; NCCT non-contrast computed tomography; PCNL percutaneous nephrolithotomy; SWL shockwave lithotripsy; VRT Volume Rendering Technique.<br /><br />The initial use of a colour-coded density-gradients stone mapping reporting system for stone density on NCCT is useful for explaining failure of SWL or failure of dissolution therapy for radiolucent stones in selected cases.Abbreviations HU Hounsfield units; MSD mean stone density; NCCT non-contrast computed tomography; PCNL percutaneous nephrolithotomy; SWL shockwave lithotripsy; VRT Volume Rendering Technique.Objectives To evaluate ureteric stenting practice patterns amongst a range of academic and community urologists, and to examine the nomenclature used to identify an indwelling ureteric stent from both our questionnaire and from a review of the literature. Subjects and methods A 16-question, peer-reviewed online survey was distributed to members of the Mid-Atlantic American Urological Association. Responses were collected over a 1-month period. Questions included demographics, ureteric stenting practice patterns, and utilization of stenting nomenclature. Inappropriate use of nomenclature was defined as a mismatch between the visually depicted stents and the written description amongst urologists. [https://www.selleckchem.com/products/Dihydroartemisinin(DHA).html see more] Trends in ureteric stenting and nomenclature usage were tabulated and analyzed. Results Of 863 members, 105 (12.2%) responded to the survey. There was a wide variety of practice settings, with the single-specialty group (44.2%) and academic/university (27.9%) being the two most common. Most providers used both cystoscopy and fluoroscopy to place stents (87.5%) as compared to fluoroscopy alone (12.5%). Most urologists (63.5%) removed stents with cystoscopy as compared to using a stent string (36.5%). While about half (51.0%) of the respondents left stents in situ for ≤3 months, many respondents (43.3%) felt comfortable with maximum dwell times of up to 6 months. The most commonly placed stent was the double pigtail stent (80.8%). However, most respondents inappropriately described this stent design as a Double J stent (72.1%). In the recent literature, 80% of articles clearly defined as using double pigtail stents, incorrectly identified their stent as a 'Double J'. Conclusions Variations in ureteric stenting practice patterns exist amongst community and academic urologists. Although most urologists utilize double pigtail ureteric stents, the majority inaccurately identified this stent design as a Double J. We propose use of the term 'indwelling ureteric stent' (IUS) unless describing any specific stent design.Objectives To develop and validate a scoring system to assess the need for emergency intervention (EI) in patients with uncomplicated acute renal colic (ARC) due to ureteric stones. Patients and methods From May 2017 to April 2019, 382 adult patients presented to emergency department with ARC due to ureteral stones diagnosed by non-contrast computed tomography. Patients with solitary kidney, complications secondary to obstruction (intractable vomiting, fever or sepsis), bilateral ureteric stones, Stage ≥3 chronic kidney disease or those who underwent treatment of urolithiasis within the past 6 months were excluded. EI was performed in cases with persistent or recurrent pain despite analgesics. Multivariate analysis was performed for the first 200 patients to detect risk factors for EI. The score was developed from significant factors. Sensitivity and specificity of the ARC score were calculated using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The data of last 182 patients were used for validation of the score.