Objective To investigate the diagnosis and treatment strategy of urosepsis caused by ureteral calculi in solitary kidney. Methods The clinical data of patients with urosepsis caused by ureteral calculi in solitary kidney in the Department of Urology of Chengdu 363 Hospital Affiliated to Southwest Medical University from March 2015 to March 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. Results A total of 23 patients were included. One patient received ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy, after which urosepsis and renal function deteriorated, then got better after anti-infection and hemodialysis treatment in intensive care unit; 17 patients received implantation of ureteral stent by cystoscopy, and 5 patients received percutaneous nephrostomy by ultrasound guiding, the 22 patients received ureteroscopic lithotripsy or flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy electively. One patients had subcapsular renal hematoma postoperatively and worse renal insufficiency, the rest 22 patients had improved renal function. All patients were cured clinically. Conclusions For solitary kidney patients who have urosepsis caused by ureteral calculi, emergency treatment is necessary. The relief of urinary obstruction must be based on effective anti-infection. Choosing cystoscopic ureteral stent implantation or percutaneous nephrostomy depends on patients’ individualization. Ureterscopic lithotripsy simultaneously is not recommended. Ureteral intubation before cystoscopic ureteral stent implantation is important, which can increase the success rate of ureteral stent implantation.
Objective To evaluate the ambulatory surgery mode by using health economical mothods and provide reference for optimization and decision of surgical operation mode. Methods The patients who underwent unilateral flexible ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotriphy for ureteral calculi in Xiangya Hospital, Central South University between January 1st to December 31th, 2015 were selected in this study, including 59 with ambulatory surgery mode (the ambulatory group) and 65 with special in-hospital surgery mode (the special group). The differences in average bed occupancy time, cost, therapeutic effect, and satisfaction between the two operation modes were compared. Results The average bed occupancy time in the ambulatory group and the special group was (1.03±0.18) and (6.35±0.74) days, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The patients in both groups were followed up for one month after the operation, and the incidence of complications was 6.8% (4/59) in the ambulatory group and 6.2% (4/65) in the special group, without significant difference (P>0.05). The satisfaction score in the ambulatory group and the special group was 96.48±0.23vs. 96.53±0.18 without significant difference (P>0.05). The differences in direct medical cost [(17 738.28±1 027.85)vs. (21 307.67±554.41) yuan], direct non-medical cost [(103.39±18.25) vs. (630.76±78.90) yuan], indirect cost[ (266.93±47.12) vs. (1 640.44±190.55) yuan], and total cost [(18 128.10±1 037.76) vs. (23 558.29±619.20) yuan] between the ambulatory group and the special group were all statistically significant (P<0.05). The treatment effect index in the ambulatory group and the special group was 0.96 and 1.05, respectively; the cost-effect ratio was 18 883.44 and 22 436.47, respectively. Sensitivity analysis showed that the adjusted cost-effect ratio in the ambulatory group (16 629.64) was still lower than that in the special group (20 534.91). Conclusions The cost-effect ratio of ambulatory surgery mode is superior than that of special in-hospital surgery mode, and there is no obvious difference in patients satisfaction between the two modes. Ambulatory surgery mode can be recommended to patients who meet the indications of day surgery.
Objective To assess the efficacy of medical expulsive therapy for ureteral calculi with tamsulosin. Methods We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA) Database, The Cochrane Library and Chinese Journal Full-text Database from 1995 to September 2006, as well as the proceedings of urological scientific conferences from 2000 to 2006. Randomized controlled trials(RCTs) comparing tamsulosin and other therapies for ureteral calculi among adults were included. Data were extracted by two reviewers independently and synthesized by STATA 9.0 software. Results A total of 16 studies involving 1521 patients with distal or juxtavesical ureteral calculi were included. Compared with conservative therapy, tamsulosin showed higher expulsion rate [RR 1.50, 95%CI (1.20 to 1.87), Plt;0.0001], shorter expulsion time [SMD –1.29, 95%CI (–2.27, –0.31)] and fewer patients requiring ESWL or ureteroscopy [RR 0.40, 95%CI (0.27, 0.59), Plt;0.05]. Compared with conservative therapy, the combination of tamsulosin plus deflazacort also showed higher expulsion rate [RR 1.59, 95%CI (1.31, 1.93)], shorter expulsion time [SMD –0.8, 95%CI (–1.18, –0.42)] and fewer patients requiring ESWL or ureteroscopy [RR 0.13, 95%CI (0.06, 0.31), Plt;0.05]. Compared with deflazacort alone, the combination of tamsulosin plus deflazacort demonstrated similar expulsion rate [RR 1.31, 95%CI (0.78, 2.23), P=0.31], but significantly reduced the dosage of analgesics [SMD 15.20, 95%CI (14.98, 15.52)] and decreased the proportion of patients requiring ESWL or ureteroscopy [RR 0.09,, 95%CI (0.02, 0.47), Plt;0.05]. Compared with deflazacort plus nifedipine, the combination of tamsulosin plus deflazacort showed higher expulsion rate [RR 1.20, 95%CI (1.07, 1.35), P=0.002], but similar expulsion time [SMD –1.34, 95%CI (–3.47, 0.79)] and proportion of patients requiring ESWL or ureteroscopy [RR 0.34, 95%CI (0.05, 2.22), Pgt;0.05]. As for side effects, tamsulosin-based treatment and conservative therapy were comparable (Pgt;0.05). Conclusions Tamsulosin has a beneficial effect on the expulsion of ureteral calculi, especially for distal and juxtavesical ureteral calculi. Tamsulosin-based medical expulsive therapy at the dosage of 0.4mg daily is effective and safe for patients with distal ureteral calculi. More large-scale studies are required to define the efficacy of combination therapy of tamsulosin plus deflazacort.
目的:探讨B超监测下输尿管镜治疗输尿管结石的临床疗效及可行性。方法:2007年12月~2008年12月采用B超监测下输尿管镜治疗输尿管结石患者34例,结石位于上段4例,中段11例,下段19例。结果:一次性碎石治愈者33例,一次性碎石成功率97%,手术时间(40±15)min,术后2~7天排尽结石,术后住院平均时间3.5(2～5)天。结论:B超监测下输尿管镜治疗输尿管结石对于手术操作者易于随时动态观察结石情况,对于大于0.4 cm的碎石块无遗漏,增加术中一次碎石成功率,可行性高。
Objective To evaluate the value of Ureteral Stent Placement before Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL). Methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 4, 2010), MEDLINE (OVID 1950 to April 2010), EMbase (1979 to April 2010), CBM (1978 to April 2010), CNKI (1979 to April 2010), and VIP (1989 to April 2010), and manually searched journals as well. All the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of treating ureteral stone with ESWL after stent placement were included. We evaluated the risk of the bias of the included RCTs according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.1. The Cochrane Collaboration’s software RevMan 5.0 was used for meta-analysis. Results Three RCTs with C-level evidence involving 319 ureteral stone patients were identified. The results of meta-analyses showed that: a) Effect of treatment: The ureteral stent placement before ESWL did not take better effects in aspects of the complete clearance rate (WMD= 1.10, 95%CI 0.87 to 1.38), the quantity of lithotripsy (WMD= 0.43, 95%CI – 1.05 to 0.19), the frequency of shock wave (WMD= 0.00, 95%CI – 0.25 to 0.25), and the power of shock wave (WMD= 0.20, 95%CI – 0.05 to 0.46); and b) Postoperative complications: The ureteral stent placement were prone to cause dysuria (RR= 2.30, 95%CI 1.62 to 3.26), microscopic hematuria (RR= 2.66, 95%CI 1.97 to 3.58), gross hematuria (RR= 6.50, 95%CI 1.50 to 28.15), pyuria (RR= 1.78, 95%CI 1.44 to 2.21), positive urine culture (RR= 2.13, 95%CI 1.71 to 2.64), and suprapubic pain (RR= 3.10, 95%CI 1.59 to 6.04). Conclusions Ureteral stent placement before ESWL is inadvisable. Multi-factors which lead to bias affected the authenticity of our review, such as low-quality and small amount of RCTs. Further large-scale trials are required.
ObjectivesTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of doxazosin for ureterolithiasis.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library and CNKI databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of comparing doxazosin with conservative treatment or tamsulosin for ureterolithiasis from inception to October, 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies, then, RevMan 5.3 software was used to perform meta-analysis.ResultsA total of 15 RCTs involving 1 062 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: compared with conservative treatment, doxazosin significantly facilitated ureteral stone expulsion (RR=1.62, 95%CI 1.45 to 1.81, P<0.000 01). No statistical significant difference was found in stone-free rate (RR=0.96, 95%CI 0.83 to 1.11, P=0.57), stone expulsion time (SMD=−0.17, 95%CI −0.52 to 0.19, P=0.35) or pain episode frequency (SMD=0.21, 95%CI −0.15 to 0.56, P=0.25) between doxazosin and tamsulosin. Treatment-associated serious side effects were rarely reported.ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that doxazosin is an efficient and safe medical expulsion agent for ureterolithiasis management. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high quality studies are required to verify above conclusions.
ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) versus ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URL) in the treatment of impacted proximal ureteral stones>1 cm. MethodsWe electronically searched PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase, WanFang, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure and VIP database (by the end of July 2015) to collect randomized controlled trials involving PCNL vs. URL for the treatment of impacted proximal ureteral stones> 1 cm. The quality of those trials were assessed. Data were extracted and analyzed with RevMan 5.3 software. ResultsSix randomized controlled trials were finally obtained after screening. A total of 487 patients were included for a Meta-analysis. The results showed that, as compared with the control group (URL), the patients in the trial group (PCNL) had the following features: ① There was a remarkable improvement of stone clearance rate [RR=1.20, 95% CI (1.09, 1.33), P=0.000 3].② There was no statistical difference in postoperative fever rates, urinary tract perforation rates [RR=1.73, 95%CI (0.43, 7.00), P=0.45; RR=1.02, 95%CI (0.11, 9.37), P=0.99], but the incidence of hematuria was higher [RR=1.99, 95%CI (1.09, 3.62), P=0.03], and the mean operative duration was longer [WMD=30.03 minutes, 95%CI (10.04, 50.02) minuntes, P=0.003].③ The mean hospitalization stay was delayed by an average of 3.73 days [WMD=3.73 days, 95%CI (3.02, 4.44) days, P<0.000 01]. ConclusionPCNL is better than URL in the stone clearance rate, while patients in the PCNL group have to stay in the hospital much longer, and should bear longer mean operative duration.