Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Urologia ; 89(1): 79-84, 2022 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33427095

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of emergency ureteroscopy (URS) compared with elective URS. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent URS for isolated ureteral stones in a single center from October 2001 to February 2014. Our patient cohort was divided into two groups: an emergency URS group (Group A), which consisted of patients who underwent URS within the first 24 h of admission, and an elective or planned URS group (Group B). The URS success rate was defined as being the incidence of successful stone fragmentation and whether there was resolution of renal obstruction. RESULTS: A total of 2957 patients' medical records were available for analysis. Of these, 704 (21%) comprised of emergency cases and the remaining 2253 (79%) were elective cases. Patients in Group A were younger, had a smaller BMIs, and had smaller stone sizes (p < 0.001). The URS success rate was found to be 97% in Group A and 96% in Group B (p = 0.35). Intraoperative or postoperative complication rates were not found to vary significantly between the groups (8% vs 7%, respectively, p = 0.50). The incidence of ureteral stenting was nearly twice as high if URS was performed during night hours (85% vs 45%, p < 0.001). However, ureteral stenting was more prevalent in Group B compared to Group A patients (57% vs 25%, p < 0.001), possibly as a result of the number of pre-stented patients (73%). CONCLUSIONS: Emergency URS is an effective and safe option for patients with renal colic. Younger patients without pre-existing obesity and with stone sizes up to 8 mm located in the distal ureter might be a better match for emergency URS.


Assuntos
Litotripsia , Cólica Renal , Cálculos Ureterais , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento , Cálculos Ureterais/cirurgia , Ureteroscopia
2.
J Clin Med ; 10(13)2021 Jun 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34198985

RESUMO

Kidney stone disease (KSD) is a complex disease. Besides the high risk of recurrence, its association with systemic disorders contributes to the burden of disease. Sufficient water intake is crucial for prevention of KSD, however, the mineral content of water might influence stone formation, bone health and cardiovascular (CVD) risk. This study aims to analyse the variations in mineral content of bottled drinking water worldwide to evaluate the differences and describes the possible impact on nephrological and urological diseases. The information regarding mineral composition (mg/L) on calcium, bicarbonate, magnesium, sodium and sulphates was read from the ingredients label on water bottles by visiting the supermarket or consulting the online shop. The bottled waters in two main supermarkets in 21 countries were included. The evaluation shows that on a global level the mineral composition of bottled drinkable water varies enormously. Median bicarbonate levels varied by factors of 12.6 and 57.3 for still and sparkling water, respectively. Median calcium levels varied by factors of 18.7 and 7.4 for still and sparkling water, respectively. As the mineral content of bottled drinking water varies enormously worldwide and mineral intake through water might influence stone formation, bone health and CVD risk, urologists and nephrologists should counsel their patients on an individual level regarding water intake.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA