Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Tipo de documento
Assunto da revista
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Endourol ; 35(10): 1454-1459, 2021 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33775101

RESUMO

Objectives: To determine which flexible ureterorenoscopy program would be most cost-efficient in our center, a cost efficiency analysis and a formula to assess cost efficiency feasibility of a hybrid model were performed. Methods: Total cost per case of reusable flexible ureterorenoscopes (rfURS) was retrospectively calculated and compared with two single-use flexible ureterorenoscopes (sufURS) marketed. A mathematical formula was developed from our data to identify the necessary increase of use of rfURS (NIU-rfURS) to be cost-efficient in a hybrid system utilizing sufURS for only high-risk-of-breakage cases. Results: In 57 months, 983 procedures were performed using 4 digital rfURS (Flex-XC; Storz), necessitating 45 repairs, with a total repair cost of €256.809. Including the capital investment of €24.000 per scope and €60 per sterilization cycle, the cost per case averaged €419 after 983 cases. Consistently using sufURS would have cost 55% to 127% more (respectively, Uscope PU3022® and Lithovue® at €650 and €950 manufacturer suggested retail price). On a per case analysis, the cost was initially extremely high, but declined to reach a plateau around €480 after ∼400 cases. After 155 or 274 procedures, a rfURS program appeared more cost-efficient than consistently using Lithovue or Uscope PU3022, respectively. Based on our data and formula, if we would hypothetically use Uscope PU3022 or Lithovue for 15% of the cases, the NIU-rfURS is, respectively, 28% or 74% (∼6 or 16 cases). The NIU-rfURS increases exponentially with an increased use of sufURS. Conclusion: Consistently using rfURS is more cost-efficient than the constant use of sufURS after 155 to 274 cases. We describe the first mathematical formula that allows a calculation and feasibility assessment of using both reusable and disposable fURS. To identify whether a hybrid system may be a feasible cost-efficient alternative to a rfURS-only program, any center can calculate the NIU-rfURS by entering center-specific data in the formula.


Assuntos
Cálculos Renais , Ureteroscópios , Desenho de Equipamento , Reutilização de Equipamento , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Ureteroscopia
2.
Eur Urol Focus ; 5(2): 290-300, 2019 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28753890

RESUMO

CONTEXT: The management of high-grade (Grade IV-V) renal injuries remains controversial. There has been an increase in the use of (NOM) but limited data exists comparing outcomes with open surgical exploration. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review to determine if NOM is the best first-line option for high-grade renal trauma in terms of safety and effectiveness. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for all relevant publications, without time or language limitations. The primary harm outcome was overall mortality and the primary benefit outcome was renal preservation rate. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay and complication rate. Single-arm studies were included as there were few comparative studies. Only studies with more than 50 patients were included. Data were narratively synthesised in light of methodological and clinical heterogeneity. The risk of bias of each included study was assessed. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Seven nonrandomised comparative and four single-arm studies were selected for data extraction. Seven hundred and eighty-seven patients were included from the comparative studies with 535 patients in the NOM group and 252 in the open surgical exploration group. A further 825 patients were included from single-arm studies. Results from comparative studies: overall mortality: NOM (0-3%), open surgical exploration (0-29%); renal preservation rate: NOM (84-100%), open surgical exploration (0-82%); complication rate: NOM (5-32%), open surgical exploration (10-76%). Overall mortality and renal preservation rate were significantly better in the NOM group whereas there was no statistical difference with regard to complication rate. Length of hospital stay was found be significantly reduced in the NOM group. Patients in the open surgical exploration group were more likely to have Grade V injuries, have a lower systolic blood pressure, and higher injury severity score on admission. CONCLUSIONS: No randomised controlled trials were identified and significant heterogeneity existed with regard to outcome reporting. However, NOM appeared to be safe and effective in a stable patient with a higher renal preservation rate, a shorter length of stay, and a comparable complication rate to open surgical exploration. Overall mortality was higher in the open surgical exploration group, though this was likely due to selection bias. PATIENT SUMMARY: The data of this systematic review suggest nonoperative management continues to be favoured to surgical exploration in the management of high-grade renal trauma whenever possible. However, comparisons between both interventions are difficult as patients who have surgery are often more seriously injured than those managed nonoperatively, and existing studies do not report on outcomes consistently.


Assuntos
Tratamento Conservador/métodos , Rim/lesões , Rim/cirurgia , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/diagnóstico por imagem , Humanos , Escala de Gravidade do Ferimento , Tempo de Internação/tendências , Mortalidade/tendências , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados não Aleatórios como Assunto
3.
Eur Urol Focus ; 3(6): 545-553, 2017 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28753868

RESUMO

CONTEXT: The evidence base for optimal acute management of pelvic fracture-related posterior urethral injuries needs to be reviewed because of evolving endoscopic techniques. The current standard of care is suprapubic cystostomy followed by delayed urethroplasty. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the evidence base comparing early endoscopic realignment with cystostomy and delayed urethroplasty regarding stricture rate, the need for subsequent procedures, and functional outcomes. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic search in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Review, and www.clinicaltrials.gov without time or language limitations. Both medical subject heading and free text terms as well as variations of root word were searched. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), nonrandomised comparative studies and single-arm case series were included, as long as ≥10 patients were enrolled. Data were narratively synthesised in light of methodological and clinical heterogeneity. The risk of bias of each included study was assessed. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: No RCTs were found. Six nonrandomised comparative studies and met inclusion criteria and were selected for data extraction. Noncomparative studies with more than 10 participants were included resulting in seven eligible studies. From the comparative papers the results of 219 patients were reported: 142 in the realignment group and 77 in the group undergoing cystostomy with delayed repair. The noncomparative studies reported on a further 150 cases. An overall stricture rate of 49% was evident in the endoscopic realignment group. Of these patients, 50% (28.1% overall) could be managed by endoscopic procedures and 40.3% (18.5% of intervention group) required anastomotic repair. CONCLUSIONS: No RCTs were found and the included nonrandomised studies have heterogeneous populations and a high degree of bias. About half of the patients were free of stricture and thus did not undergo delayed urethroplasty in case early endoscopic realignment had been performed. PATIENT SUMMARY: This systematic review of literature of urethral trauma revealed there are no well conducted comparative studies of newer endoscopic treatments versus standard treatments which include more extensive surgery. The results of the reports we selected based on specific characteristics are often influenced by variable factors. After careful analysis of these results we can conclude that the newer endoscopic techniques might resolve the risk of urethral injury due to pubic fractures in about half of the patients. Because of various confounders we cannot identify those patients who would benefit from this procedure or who might be possibly harmed.


Assuntos
Endoscopia/métodos , Fraturas Ósseas/complicações , Ossos Pélvicos/lesões , Uretra/lesões , Cistostomia/métodos , Humanos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/cirurgia , Reoperação/estatística & dados numéricos , Fatores de Tempo , Uretra/cirurgia , Estreitamento Uretral/etiologia , Estreitamento Uretral/cirurgia , Incontinência Urinária/etiologia
4.
Urol Case Rep ; 4: 55-6, 2016 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26793582

RESUMO

TURP is a widespread urologic procedure that is performed by many urologists. This report describes a rare complication that causes serious morbidity because it is not recognized in time. This is also the first report of a prostatosymphyseal fistula treated without major surgery. Eventually diagnosis is made by a MRI 5 months after surgery. Decompressive surgery was necessary to treat pubic osteïtis with invalidating pain. Culture results revealed Escherichia coli but eventually the diagnosis was made by fistulography. Treatment consisted of bladder drainage and long-term antibiotic treatment and these could eventually heal the fistula.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA