Open mini‐access ureterolithotomy: the treatment of choice for the refractory ureteric stone?

Sharma, Dhiraj; Maharaj, Dale; Naraynsingh, Vijay

doi:10.1046/j.1464-410x.2003.04438.x

Cited by 15 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 18 publications

(33 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This marked benefit could be appreciated from significant difference in pain score and postoperative analgesic requirement between 2 groups. Although, small mini incision ureterolithotomy, utilizing muscle splitting rather than muscle cutting approach, has been described in literature which produce equivalent results and less morbidity in comparison to laparoscopic ureterolithotomy [23]. Further randomized controlled prospective studies are required to elucidate the benefits of mini-incision ureterolithotomy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prospective Randomized Comparison of Open versus Transperitoneal Laparoscopic Ureterolithotomy: Experience of a Single Center from Northern India

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: Prospective randomized study on transperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (TPLU) versus open ureterolithotomy (OU) for treatment of large impacted ureteric stones (≥ 1.5 cm) and assessment of overall results. Material & Methods: In a prospective study between 2010 to 2012, 30 patients underwent TPLU and 30 OU based on 1:1 randomization. The operation was indicated primarily in 44 cases or after failed shock-wave lithotripsy/ureteroscopy in 16 cases. Two groups were compared for operative time, success rate, visual pain score, analgesic requirement, hospital stay, and postoperative complications. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS® version 16.0 using Fisher exact or Mann-Whitney U tests with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant. Results: The difference in visual pain score (6.2 in TPLU group vs 3.1 in OU group on day 1; 4.8 vs. 2.4 on day 2) and tramadol requirements (184.32 mg in TPLU group vs. 150.87 mg in OU group on day 1; 97.34 mg vs. 65.56 mg on day 2) were statistically significant and more in OU. Hospital stay and convalescence were significantly lower in the TPLU. However, stone removal in one attempt was similar in both the groups. Conclusion: Although successful stone removal rates are equal in both groups, TPLU is associated significantly with less postoperative pain, less analgesic requirement, shorter hospital stay and short convalescence in comparison to OU.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prospective Randomized Comparison of Open versus Transperitoneal Laparoscopic Ureterolithotomy: Experience of a Single Center from Northern India

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Open surgery was required for two of our patients with hard large stones. Sharma et al (29) reported that open mini-access ureterolithotomy to be a safe and reliable minimally invasive procedure; its role is mainly confined to salvage for failed first-line stone treatments but in selected cases, where a poor outcome can be predicted from other methods, it is an excellent first-line treatment. Laparoscopy has the advantage of high probability of removing the entire stone in one procedure, exactly like open surgery.…”

Section: Commentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy for distal ureteric calculi: efficacy and patient satisfaction

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: We compared the efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and ureteroscopy (URS) for the treatment of distal ureteral calculi with respect to patient satisfaction. Materials and Methods: This is a prospective study where a total of 212 patients with solitary, radiopaque distal ureteral calculi were treated with ESWL (n = 92) using Dornier lithotriptor S (MedTech Europe GmbH) or URS (n = 120). Patient and stone characteristics, treatment parameters, clinical outcomes, and patient satisfaction were assessed for each group. Results: The 2 groups were comparable in regard to patient age, sex, stone size, and side of treatment. The stone-free status for ESWL and URS at 3 months was 81.5% and 97.5%, respectively (p < 0.0001). In addition, 88% of patients who underwent ESWL versus 20% who underwent URS were discharged home the day of procedure. Minor complications occurred in 3.3% and 8.3% of the ESWL and URS groups, respectively (p = 0.127). No ureteral perforation or stricture occurred in the URS group. Postoperative flank pain and dysuria were more severe in the URS than ESWL group, although the differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.16). Patient satisfaction was high for both groups, including 94% for URS and 80% for ESWL (p = 0.002). Conclusions: URS is more effective than ESWL for the treatment of distal ureteral calculi. ESWL was more often performed on an outpatient basis, and showed a trend towards less flank pain and dysuria, fewer complications and quicker convalescence. Patient satisfaction was significantly higher for URS according to the questionnaire used in this study.

show abstract

“…For the ureter, the open surgical technique described is open mini ureterotomy [6]. The indications are all proximal ureteral calculi but mostly those impacted or infected [7].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Upper Urinary Tract Calculi in Senegal: A Comparative Study between Open Surgery and Endoscopy, a Review of 89 Cases

Kane¹,

Diallo²,

Niang³

et al. 2015

OJU

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim was to assess the place of endourologic intervention in our practice and compare it to open surgery in the management of upper urinary tract calculi in Senegal. Patients and Methods: This was a retrospective study conducted at both the Principal and Grand Yoff Hospitals in which 89 patients with upper urinary tract calculi were mobilized. All patients with symptomatic upper urinary tract colic symptoms were included. Results: Eighty-nine were followed up during the study period, 63 men and 36 women (sex of ratio 1.2). The average age was 44 years with extremes 22 -75 years. Forty two patients, including 28 men and 14 women (sex ratio 1: 2) were treated with open surgery. The mean age was 42.75 years (4 -75 years). The average duration of hospitalization after open surgery was 8 days (4 -60 days). The mean stone size in open surgery was 23 mm (5 mm -45 mm). Complications noted were: 2 cases of urinomas (4.76%), 1 case of lower back fistula (2.38%), 1 case of renal pelvis fistula (2.38%) and 1 case (2.38%) of infection. Forty seven patients including 35 men (55.6%) and 12 women (46.2%) were treated by endourology. The average length of hospital stay was 2 days (2 d -3 d). The average stone size treated by endourology was 13 mm (5 mm -40 mm). No complications were observed in this group. The cost of open surgery was a third of that of endourology. Conclusion: Endoscopic surgery, as is observed from industrialized countries occupies a prominent place in the treatment of upper urinary tract calculi in Senegal; however, the only limiting factor encountered is the cost which remains out of reach for patients and burdening the * Corresponding author. R. Kane et al. 143 budgets of our hospitals with limited means.

show abstract

Open mini‐access ureterolithotomy: the treatment of choice for the refractory ureteric stone?

Cited by 15 publications

References 18 publications

Prospective Randomized Comparison of Open versus Transperitoneal Laparoscopic Ureterolithotomy: Experience of a Single Center from Northern India

Prospective Randomized Comparison of Open versus Transperitoneal Laparoscopic Ureterolithotomy: Experience of a Single Center from Northern India

Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy for distal ureteric calculi: efficacy and patient satisfaction

Upper Urinary Tract Calculi in Senegal: A Comparative Study between Open Surgery and Endoscopy, a Review of 89 Cases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About