Primary versus deferred ureteroscopy for management of calculus anuria: a prospective randomized study
Obstructive anuria can be managed by primary ureteroscopy (URS) or deferred URS after initial ureteral stenting. We want to compare the primary URS and deferred URS in the management of calculus anuria regarding the feasibility and clinical outcome. Between January 2012 and December 2014, 150 patien...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Central European journal of urology 2018-01, Vol.71 (4), p.462-466 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Obstructive anuria can be managed by primary ureteroscopy (URS) or deferred URS after initial ureteral stenting. We want to compare the primary URS and deferred URS in the management of calculus anuria regarding the feasibility and clinical outcome.
Between January 2012 and December 2014, 150 patients with anuria due to ureteral calculi were prospectively randomized according to the timing of ureteroscopic intervention into two groups; deferred URS group (69 patients who were treated initially by ureteral stenting) and primary URS group (81 patients who were treated by emergency URS). Follow-up was at least 6 months postoperatively.
Complete stone clearance was 87 % and 75.3% for deferred and primary URS groups, respectively (p = 0.097). Renal function normalized in 94.2% of deferred URS vs. 97.5% of primary URS (p = 0.414). Deferred URS group had a 2.9 % overall complication rate in comparison to 9.9 % for the primary URS group (p = 0.109). Ureteral perforation/pyelonephritis was noted in 6.2% of the primary URS group only (p = 0.043). The median number of maneuvers required until stone clearance was one (range 1-5) for primary URS vs. two (range 2-3) for deferred URS (p |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2080-4806 2080-4873 2080-4873 |
DOI: | 10.5173/ceju.2018.1768 |