Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Filtros adicionais











Intervalo de ano
1.
Arch Esp Urol ; 68(4): 435-40, 2015 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26033764

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare ureterolithotripsy and inserting only ureteral-j stent in terms of efficiency, safety and patient comfort in treatment of ureteral calculi in pregnant patients. METHODS: Seventy patients who developed hydronephrosis due to ureteral calculi during pregnancy, and on whom endoscopic intervention was performed were included in the study. In a center, the stones were broken up by ureteroscopy, and then ureteral stents (JJ) were placed if needed. In the other center, nothing was performed on the stones, and only ureteral stents (JJ) was placed. For the statistical analysis, Pearson's chi squared test and the Mann-Whitney U tests were used and the significance level was determined as p < 0.05. RESULTS: The average age of the patients was 26.2 years (18-39) and the average gestational week was 23.4 weeks (8-36). While no significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of the frequency of complications (p=0.381) and post-operative pyelonephritis (p=0.2), the need for additional intervention in the group on whom ureteroscopy was performed was found to be less (9.7% vs. 31%; p=0.032). Moderate or severe LUTS or flank pain during the period between the procedure and the birth was found to be significantly less in the group in which ureterolithotripsy was performed (14% vs. 55%; p=0.036). CONCLUSIONS: Ureterolithotripsy is a safe and more comfortable procedure than only ureteral double-j insertion on pregnant patients with ureterolithiasis.


Assuntos
Complicações na Gravidez/cirurgia , Cálculos Ureterais/cirurgia , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Gravidez , Estudos Retrospectivos , Stents , Ureteroscopia , Adulto Jovem
2.
Arch. esp. urol. (Ed. impr.) ; 68(4): 435-440, mayo 2015. tab
Artigo em Inglês | IBECS | ID: ibc-137272

RESUMO

Objectives: We aimed to compare ureterolithotripsy and inserting only ureteral-j stent in terms of efficiency, safety and patient comfort in treatment of ureteral calculi in pregnant patients. Methocs: Seventy patients who developed hydronephrosis due to ureteral calculi during pregnancy, and on whom endoscopic intervention was performed were included in the study. In a center, the stones were broken up by ureteroscopy, and then ureteral stents (JJ) were placed if needed. In the other center, nothing was performed on the stones, and only ureteral stents (JJ) was placed. For the statistical analysis, Pearson’s chisquared test and the Mann-Whitney U tests were used and the significance level was determined as p < 0.05. Results: The average age of the patients was 26.2 years (18-39) and the average gestational week was 23.4 weeks (8-36). While no significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of the frequency of complications (p=0.381) and post-operative pyelonephritis (p=0.2), the need for additional intervention in the group on whom ureteroscopy was performed was found to be less (9.7% vs. 31%; p=0.032). Moderate or severe LUTS or flank pain during the period between the procedure and the birth was found to be significantly less in the group in which ureterolithotripsy was performed (14% vs. 55%; p=0.036). Conclusions: Ureterolithotripsy is a safe and more comfortable procedure than only ureteral double-j insertion on pregnant patients with ureterolithiasis (AU)


Objetivos: El objetivo del estudio es comparar la ureteroscopia con litotricia in situ y la inserción aislada de catéter doble J en el tratamiento de la litiasis ureteral en pacientes embarazadas, en términos de eficiencia, seguridad y confort del paciente. Métodos: Se incluyeron en el estudio 70 pacientes que desarrollaron hidronefrosis por cálculos ureterales durante el embarazo, en las que se realizó una intervención endoscópica. En un centro las piedras fueron rotas por ureteroscopia con inserción posterior de stents ureterales si era necesario. En el otro centro, no se hacía nada sobre la litiasis y sólo se colocaban Catéteres doble J. El análisis estadístico se realizó mediante los tests de Chi cuadrado de Pearson y U de Mann-Whitney con un nivel de significación estadística determinado como p<0,05. Resultados: La edad media de las pacientes era 26,2 años (18-39) y la media de semanas de gestación 23,4 (8-36). Aunque no se encontraron diferencias significativas entre los dos grupos en cuanto a la frecuencia de complicaciones (p=0,381) y pielonefritis postoperatoria (p=0,2), la necesidad de intervenciones adicionales fue menor en el grupo en el que se realizó ureteroscopia (9,7 vs. 31%; p=0,032). Se vio que la presencia de síntomas del tracto urinario inferior moderados o severos, o dolor lumbar, durante el periodo entre el procedimiento y el parto fue significativamente menor en el grupo de ureteroscopia (14% vs 55%; p=0,036). Conclusiones: En pacientes embarazadas con litiasis ureteral la ureteroscopia con litotricia in situ es un procedimiento seguro y más confortable que la colocación de un doble J sólo (AU)


Assuntos
Feminino , Humanos , Gravidez , Adulto Jovem , Cálculos Renais/terapia , Cálculos Renais , Litotripsia , Ureteroscopia/tendências , Gravidez , Cálculos Renais
3.
Med Glas (Zenica) ; 11(1): 165-9, 2014 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24496359

RESUMO

AIM: To evaluate the role of doppler ultrasonographorin managing hydronephrosis during pregnancy. METHODS: The study included 27 pregnant patients with unilateral symptomatic persistent hydronephrosis (group 1) and 38 pregnant patients with physiological hydronephrosis of pregnancy (group 2). All pregnant patients underwent Doppler Ultrasonography to determine the Resistive Index (RI) and the difference between the RI of the corresponding and contralateral kidney (Delta Resistive Index = delta RI). RESULTS: There were no statistical differences between the two groups in terms of age, mean gestational period, or number of pregnancies. The mean renal RI of the hydronephrosis side was 0.68 ± 0.05 in group 1 and 0.60 ± 0.05 in group 2 (p less than 0.001). The mean delta RI of group 1 was significantly higher than the mean delta RI of group 2 (0.07 ± 0.03 versus 0.02 ± 0.01, respectively, p less than 0.001). The RI and delta RI were considered positive with values of more than 0.70 and more than 0.04, respectively, and the RI was sensitive in 44.4% and specific in 92.1% for intervention treatment. The corresponding values for delta RI were 88.9% and 89.5%. The positive predictive value and negative predictive value of delta RI for intervention were 85.7% and 91.9%, respectively. CONCLUSION: It is much better to consider delta RI than RI when deciding on interventional treatment in hydronephrosis during pregnancy.


Assuntos
Hidronefrose/diagnóstico por imagem , Hidronefrose/terapia , Complicações na Gravidez/diagnóstico por imagem , Complicações na Gravidez/terapia , Ultrassonografia Doppler , Ultrassonografia Pré-Natal , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Gravidez , Estudos Prospectivos , Fatores de Tempo , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA