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










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
World J Urol ; 39(9): 3593-3598, 2021 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33616709

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To analyze the efficiency and cost-utility profile of ureteroscopy versus shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of reno-ureteral stones smaller than 2 cm. METHODS: Patients treated for urinary stones smaller than 2 cm were included in this study (n = 750) and divided into two groups based on technique of treatment. To assess the cost-utility profile a sample of 48 patients (50% of each group) was evaluated. Quality of life survey (Euroqol 5QD-3L) before-after treatment was applied, Markov model was designed to calculate quality of life in each status of the patients (stone or stone-free with and without double-J stent) and to estimate the incremental cost-utility. Monte carlo simulation was conducted for a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Chi-square was used for comparing qualitative variables and T student's for continuous variables. RESULTS: Shock wave lithotripsy group had 408 (54.4%) and ureteroscopy group had 342 (45.6%) patients. Of them, 56.3% were treated for renal stones and 43.7% for ureteral stones. Ureteroscopy produced slightly higher overall quality of patients' life, but produced a significant higher overall cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) than shock wave lithotripsy, exceeding the cost-utility threshold (20,000€/QALY). Sensitivity analysis confirmed results in 93.65% of cases. Difference was maintained in subgroup analysis (ureteral vs renal stones). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that in our clinical setting shock wave lithotripsy has better cost-utility profile than ureteroscopy for treatment of reno-ureteral stones less than 2 cm, but excluding waiting times, in ideal clinical setting, ureteroscopy would have better cost-utility profile than shock wave lithotripsy.


Asunto(s)
Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Cálculos Renales/economía , Cálculos Renales/terapia , Litotripsia por Láser , Litotricia , Cálculos Ureterales/economía , Cálculos Ureterales/terapia , Ureteroscopía , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Cálculos Renales/patología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , España , Resultado del Tratamiento , Cálculos Ureterales/patología
2.
Urol Int ; 101(2): 232-235, 2018.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27924801

RESUMEN

Genitourinary melanoma accounts for 0.1-0.2% of melanoma, the scrotum being its rarest location. We report about an 85-year-old patient who was referred to our outpatient clinic due to the presence of a scrotum black papule for 20 months. Wide local excision was performed, and histology revealed a malignant melanoma. Chest and abdominal CT revealed metastatic disease, so chemotherapy, immunotherapy and radiotherapy were administered. We describe the evolution over 1 year in this unusual location, as well as complications and the currently available therapeutic options to cure this disease.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de los Genitales Masculinos/patología , Melanoma/secundario , Escroto/patología , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Quimioterapia Adyuvante , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Dermatologicos , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Resultado Fatal , Neoplasias de los Genitales Masculinos/terapia , Humanos , Inmunoterapia/métodos , Masculino , Melanoma/terapia , Radioterapia Adyuvante , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...