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











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Endourol ; 37(7): 753-760, 2023 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37071154

RESUMO

Objective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the current availability of technology for urolithiasis treatment and ureteroscopy (URS). Perioperative practice patterns, availability of ureteroscopic technologies, pre- and poststenting practices, and methods to alleviate stent-related symptoms (SRS) were assessed via a survey of members of the Endourological Society. Methods: We distributed a 43-question survey online via the Qualtrics platform to members of the Endourological Society. The survey consisted of questions pertaining to the following topics: general (6), equipment (17), preoperative URS (9), intraoperative URS (2), and postoperative URS (9). Results: A total of 191 urologists responded to the survey and 126 completed all questions of the survey (66%). Fifty-one percent (65/127) of urologists were fellowship trained and dedicated an average of 58% of their practice to stone management. In terms of procedures, most urologists performed URS most commonly (68%), followed by percutaneous nephrolithotomy (23%) and extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (11%). Ninety percent (120/133) of respondent urologists purchased a new ureteroscope within the last 5 years (16% single-use scopes, 53% reusable, and 31% purchased both). Fifty-three percent (70/132) of the respondents stated that they would be interested in a ureteroscope that can sense intrarenal pressure, with an additional 28% (37/132) stating they would be interested depending on the cost. Seventy-four percent (98/133) of responders purchased a new laser within the last 5 years, and 59% (57/97) changed their lasering technique due to the new laser. Urologists are performing primary ureteroscopy for obstructing stones in 70% of cases, and prefer prestenting patients for subsequent URS in 30% (on average after 21 days). Seventy-one percent (90/126) of responders insert a ureteral stent after uncomplicated URS, which is removed, on average, after 8 days in uncomplicated cases and 21 days after complicated URS. Most urologists give analgesics, alpha-blockers, and anticholinergics for SRS and <10% prescribe opioids. Conclusion: Our survey revealed urologists' eagerness for the early adoption of novel technologies and adherence to conservative practice patterns focused on patient safety.


Assuntos
Litotripsia , Ureter , Cálculos Ureterais , Humanos , Cálculos Ureterais/cirurgia , Ureteroscopia/métodos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Ureteroscópios , Resultado do Tratamento
3.
Curr Opin Urol ; 33(2): 122-128, 2023 03 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36354124

RESUMO

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Despite technological advancements in endourological surgery, there is room for improvement in preoperative patient optimization strategies. This review updates recent best clinical practices that can be implemented for optimal surgical outcomes. RECENT FINDINGS: Outcome and complication predictions using novel scoring systems and techniques have shown to assist clinical decision-making and patient counseling. Innovative preoperative simulation and localization methods for percutaneous nephrolithotomy have been evaluated to minimize puncture-associated adverse events. Novel antibiotic prophylaxis strategies and further recognition of risk factors that attribute to postoperative infections have shown the potential to minimize perioperative morbidity. Accumulating data on the roles of preoperative stenting and selective oral alpha-blockers adds evidence to the current paradigm of preventive measures for ureteral injury. SUMMARY: Ample tools and technologies exist that can be utilized preoperatively to improve surgical outcomes. The combination of these innovations, along with validation in larger-scale studies, presents the cornerstone of future urolithiasis management.


Assuntos
Nefrolitotomia Percutânea , Urolitíase , Humanos , Urolitíase/cirurgia , Nefrolitotomia Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Nefrolitotomia Percutânea/métodos , Antibacterianos , Fatores de Risco , Antibioticoprofilaxia
4.
J Endourol ; 34(9): 981-986, 2020 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32578453

RESUMO

Introduction: Acquisition costs and prohibitively expensive technical support for endoscope maintenance, repair, and reprocessing have deterred adoption of flexible cystoscopes by many urologists internationally. This study evaluated the performance of a novel single-use digital cystoscope that can directly connect to a laptop or computer monitor for visualization, obviating the need for a tower. Materials and Methods: The performance characteristics of flexible single-use cystoscopes (NeoScope) were prospectively evaluated vs a reusable flexible cystoscope (Olympus) in three clinical cases and two independent benchtop testing episodes in Canada. Cystoscope maneuverability, imaging, deflection, irrigation, and ease of use of instrumentation were investigated. Additional investigations were performed during clinical use in Zimbabwe (7 patients), Egypt (10 patients), and Dominica (5 patients). Results: Bench testing revealed smaller tip diameter (4.06 vs 6.09 mm) and shorter (35.4 vs 38 cm) single-use cystoscopes vs reusable cystoscopes. Deflection of the single-use scope was superior with an empty working channel (230 up/220 down) vs the reusable (195 up/95 down) but showed a more substantial decrease in deflection on placement of instruments including a grasper. Clinical use revealed satisfactory maneuverability, ease of use of instruments, deflection, and visualization. Conclusions: Benchtop testing performance of the single-use digital flexible cystoscopes was inferior compared with reusable digital cystoscopes. However, these single-use endoscopes offer adequate illumination, imaging, and maneuverability. Direct connection to any computer monitor allowed truly portable use, allowing for treatment of patients in a variety of clinical settings without the need for ancillary equipment.


Assuntos
Cistoscópios , Cistoscopia , Canadá , Egito , Desenho de Equipamento , Humanos
5.
Curr Opin Urol ; 30(2): 166-170, 2020 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31834083

RESUMO

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Ureteral stents are necessary in the routine practice of an urologist. Choosing the correct stent and being aware of the options available will allow urologists to provide the best possible care for patients and value to the healthcare system. This review seeks to educate urologists regarding improvements in stent technology currently available or in development. RECENT FINDINGS: Research from around the world is underway to discover an ideal stent - one that is comfortable for patients, resists infection and encrustation and is affordable for hospital systems. Stent design alterations and stent coatings are revealing reductions in encrustation and bacterial colonization. Biodegradable stents and magnetic stents are being tested to prevent the discomfort of cystoscopic removal. Intraureteral stents are proving efficacious while eliminating an irritating coil from the bladder and the symptoms associated with it. SUMMARY: The studies highlighted in this review provide encouraging results in the pursuit of the ideal stent while opening discussion around new concepts and further areas of research.


Assuntos
Implantação de Prótese/efeitos adversos , Implantação de Prótese/normas , Stents/efeitos adversos , Stents/normas , Ureter/cirurgia , Ureteroscopia/efeitos adversos , Implantes Absorvíveis , Materiais Revestidos Biocompatíveis , Constrição Patológica/etiologia , Constrição Patológica/prevenção & controle , Remoção de Dispositivo/instrumentação , Remoção de Dispositivo/métodos , Remoção de Dispositivo/normas , Remoção de Dispositivo/tendências , Humanos , Desenho de Prótese , Ureteroscopia/instrumentação , Ureteroscopia/métodos , Infecções Urinárias/etiologia , Infecções Urinárias/microbiologia , Infecções Urinárias/prevenção & controle , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Urológicos/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Urológicos/instrumentação , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Urológicos/métodos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA