Is there a difference in outcomes between digital and fiberoptic flexible ureterorenoscopy procedures
作者： Murat Binbay , Emrah Yuruk , Tolga Akman , Faruk Ozgor , Mahir Seyrek
关键词:
摘要: Abstract Purpose: We aimed to compare the outcomes of patients who were treated using digital and fiberoptic flexible ureterorenoscopy (URS) for kidney stones. Patients Methods: Between September 2008 December 2009, a total 76 with either conventional ureterorenoscope (FFU) (n = 34) or (DFU) (n = 42) compared. All procedures performed by same surgeon. Preoperative, operative, postoperative data retrospectively analyzed. Results: The mean stone size was 95.2 ± 61.3 mm2 in FFU group while it 93.5 ± 57.1 mm2 DFU (P > 0.05). initial assessment entire pyelocaliceal system possible 33 34 (97%) cases 38 42 (90.4%) operative time significantly longer (54.4 ± 14.8 minutes vs 44.8 ± 17.9 minutes, P = 0.001). Flexible URS 46.5 ± 13.4 i...
liebertonline.com参考文章(15)
Petrisor Geavlete, Razvan Multescu, Bogdan Geavlete, Influence of pyelocaliceal anatomy on the success of flexible ureteroscopic approach. Journal of Endourology. ,vol. 22, pp. 2235- 2239 ,(2008) , 10.1089/END.2008.9719
Brian K. Auge, Paul K. Pietrow, Costas D. Lallas, Ganesh V. Raj, Robert W. Santa-Cruz, Glenn M. Preminger, Ureteral Access Sheath Provides Protection against Elevated Renal Pressures during Routine Flexible Ureteroscopic Stone Manipulation Journal of Endourology. ,vol. 18, pp. 33- 36 ,(2004) , 10.1089/089277904322836631
Marc L.J.E. Paffen, Joris G. Keizer, Grischa v. de Winter, Albert J. Arends, Ad J.M. Hendrikx, A comparison of the physical properties of four new generation flexible ureteroscopes: (de)flection, flow properties, torsion stiffness, and optical characteristics. Journal of Endourology. ,vol. 22, pp. 2227- 2234 ,(2008) , 10.1089/END.2008.0371
MICHAEL GRASSO, MICHAEL FICAZZOLA, Retrograde ureteropyeloscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi. The Journal of Urology. ,vol. 162, pp. 1904- 1908 ,(2000) , 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)68065-2
Manoj Monga, Sara Best, Ramakrishna Venkatesh, Caroline Ames, Courtney Lee, Michael Kuskowski, Steven Schwartz, Richard Vanlangendock, Jason Skenazy, Jaime Landman, Durability of flexible ureteroscopes: a randomized, prospective study. The Journal of Urology. ,vol. 176, pp. 137- 141 ,(2006) , 10.1016/S0022-5347(06)00575-1
Stephen Mitchell, Erik Havranek, Anup Patel, First digital flexible ureterorenoscope: initial experience. Journal of Endourology. ,vol. 22, pp. 47- 50 ,(2008) , 10.1089/END.2007.0046
Razvan Multescu, Bogdan Geavlete, Dragos Georgescu, Petrisor Geavlete, Conventional Fiberoptic Flexible Ureteroscope Versus Fourth Generation Digital Flexible Ureteroscope: A Critical Comparison Journal of Endourology. ,vol. 24, pp. 17- 21 ,(2010) , 10.1089/END.2009.0390
Olivier Traxer, Francis Dubosq, Karim Jamali, Bernard Gattegno, Philippe Thibault, New-generation flexible ureterorenoscopes are more durable than previous ones Urology. ,vol. 68, pp. 276- 279 ,(2006) , 10.1016/J.UROLOGY.2006.02.043
Manoj Monga, Derek Weiland, Renato N. Pedro, Alexandria C. Lynch, Kyle Anderson, Intrarenal manipulation of flexible ureteroscopes: a comparative study BJU International. ,vol. 100, pp. 157- 159 ,(2007) , 10.1111/J.1464-410X.2007.06925.X
Jason D Wolf, John L Phillips, Muhammad S Choudhury, THE ROLE OF CT UROGRAPHY IN EVALUATING THE UPPER URINARY TRACT The Journal of Urology. ,vol. 179, pp. 727- 727 ,(2008) , 10.1016/S0022-5347(08)62119-9