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

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
World J Urol ; 39(9): 3593-3598, 2021 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33616709

RESUMO

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.


Assuntos
Análise Custo-Benefício , Cálculos Renais/economia , Cálculos Renais/terapia , Litotripsia a Laser , Litotripsia , Cálculos Ureterais/economia , Cálculos Ureterais/terapia , Ureteroscopia , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Cálculos Renais/patologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Espanha , Resultado do Tratamento , Cálculos Ureterais/patologia
2.
Urol Int ; 101(2): 232-235, 2018.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27924801

RESUMO

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.


Assuntos
Neoplasias dos Genitais Masculinos/patologia , Melanoma/secundário , Escroto/patologia , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Quimioterapia Adjuvante , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Dermatológicos , Progressão da Doença , Evolução Fatal , Neoplasias dos Genitais Masculinos/terapia , Humanos , Imunoterapia/métodos , Masculino , Melanoma/terapia , Radioterapia Adjuvante , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA