Ureterolitotomia laparoscópica de un cálculo de uréter iliaco olvidado durante más de ocho años

Pérez, L.A. Fariña; Santiago, Daniel Pesqueira; Rico, F. Meijide; Telo, E.R. Zungri

doi:10.1016/s0210-4806(06)73426-x

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After the initial description of laparoscopic ureterolithotomy in 1979 by Wickham [11], now with the advancements in technique and experience, laparoscopy has become a highly effective modality in the treatment of complicated ureteral stones. The safety and feasibility of laparoscopic ureterolithotomy has already been demonstrated and it is a reasonable minimally invasive alternative to OU for ureteral stones not amenable to manage with endoscopic techniques [12,13,14]. Keeley et al [15] reported the advantages of transperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy in which there is high probability of removing the entire stone burden in one procedure.…”

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