Endourological treatment for lumbar ureteral stones. What are the benefits of flexible ureterorenoscopy?

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Currently, there are no established criteria regarding treatment for lumbar ureteral stones. The objective of this work is to present our results in the endourological treatment of this pathology, analyzing the variables associated with the use of the flexible ureterorenoscope. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective review of 103 patients who underwent retrograde URS with semi-rigid or flexible ureterorenoscope. Proximal location: L2-L3. Medial location: L4-L5. Semirigid URS was the initial treatment, with conversion to flexible URS when it was required to complete the procedure. Success was defined as absence of residual fragments (6 weeks). Demographic, surgical, immediate postoperative variables, and those related to the stone, were analyzed. Their correlation with the use of the flexible ureterorenoscope was evaluated. RESULTS: Mean age: 57.2 years (SD 15.6); there were 73 men (70.9%). Stone size: 8 mm (range 4-30; IQR 4.5). Proximal location: 58 (56.3%). Previous JJ: 44.7%. Previous nephrostomy: 10.7%. Semirigid URS with conversion to flexible URS: 51 (49.5%). Impacted stones: 28.2%. Intraoperative complications: 2 (1.9%). Postoperative JJ: 84.5%. Immediate postoperative complications: 23 (22.3%) (Clavien-Dindo I-II: 91.3%). Postoperative ureteral stricture: 5.8%. Success: 88.4%. Residual fragments: 12 (11.7%). Spontaneous passage: 6 (50%). Greater performance of flexible URS in proximal ureteral stones (p = 0.001) of more than 11 mm (p = 0.02) in univariate analysis, and in proximal stones [OR 3.5; 1.5-8.1; p = 0.004] in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Endourological treatment obtained a high success rate in our sample. Size greater than 11 mm and proximal ureteral location in univariate and multivariate analysis, respectively, behaved as predictors of flexible URS.

Endourological treatment for lumbar ureteral stones. What are the benefits of flexible ureterorenoscopy? / Tratamiento endourológico de la litiasis ureteral lumbar. ¿Qué aporta la ureterorrenoscopia flexible?

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Currently, there are no established criteria regarding treatment for lumbar ureteral stones. The objective of this work is to present our results in the endourological treatment of this pathology, analyzing the variables associated with the use of the flexible ureterorenoscope. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective review of 103 patients who underwent retrograde URS with semi-rigid or flexible ureterorenoscope. Proximal location: L2-L3. Medial location: L4-L5. Semirigid URS was the initial treatment, with conversion to flexible URS when it was required to complete the procedure. Success was defined as absence of residual fragments (6 weeks). Demographic, surgical, immediate postoperative variables, and those related to the stone, were analyzed. Their correlation with the use of the flexible ureterorenoscope was evaluated. RESULTS: Mean age: 57.2 years (SD 15.6); there were 73 men (70.9%). Stone size: 8mm (range 4-30; IQR 4.5). Proximal location: 58 (56.3%). Previous JJ: 44.7%. Previous nephrostomy: 10.7%. Semirigid URS with conversion to flexible URS: 51 (49.5%). Impacted stones: 28.2%. Intraoperative complications: 2 (1.9%). Postoperative JJ: 84.5%. Immediate postoperative complications: 23 (22.3%) (Clavien-Dindo I-II: 91.3%). Postoperative ureteral stricture: 5.8%. Success: 88.4%. Residual fragments: 12 (11.7%). Spontaneous passage: 6 (50%). Greater performance of flexible URS in proximal ureteral stones (P=0.001) of more than 11mm (P=0.02) in univariate analysis, and in proximal stones [OR 3.5; 1.5-8.1; P=0.004] in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Endourological treatment obtained a high success rate in our sample. Size greater than 11mm and proximal ureteral location in univariate and multivariate analysis, respectively, behaved as predictors of flexible URS.

Unusual relationship between skin lesions and esophageal cancer: a case report and review of literature.

Esophageal cancer is a rare disease. In Spain, this tumor is the third most common gastrointestinal malignancy after colorectal and gastric cancer. Esophageal adenocarcinoma metastasizes to the skin with an incidence of 1 %, generally located in the neck, head and abdomen. It usually occurs in the overlying skin of the primary tumor, but may also appear in a distant site, the scalp being the most common place. Although the pathogenesis of esophageal adenocarcinoma is not well known, the existence of genetic alterations, such as the suppressor gene, has been proved and the involvement of oncogene c-erbB-2 amplified. Cytokeratin 20 and 7 are expressed in esophageal adenocarcinoma. Typically, cutaneous metastases from internal malignancy present as firm asymptomatic nodules. These nodules usually occur in multiple arrays on the skin adjacent to the primary tumor; however, they can occasionally become painful spontaneously. The main diagnostic test of esophageal cancer is the upper endoscopy, along with histopathology for confirmation of the tumor. The developments in surgery and the discovery of new cytotoxic agents have considerably decreased the locoregional recurrence. To date, the combination of these treatment modalities for advanced adenocarcinoma revealed that the recurrences mainly occur from hematic spread. Excision of the skin lesions produces pain palliation. In patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer who have responded satisfactorily to treatment with chemotherapy, radiation and surgery while having a long history of remission, and dermatology outpatient visits by the appearance of skin lesions, should make us think among the different differential diagnoses, the possibility of cutaneous metastases.