Cargando…

A comparative study of flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy for upper urinary tract stones in patients with prior urosepsis following emergency drainage via retrograde ureteral stent or percutaneous nephrostomy

BACKGROUND: Patients with urosepsis associated with upper urinary tract stones require further stone management after emergency drainage. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of elective flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (F-URSL) for upper urinary tract stones in patients with prior urose...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liao, Sucai, Xu, Xiang, Yuan, Yuan, Tang, Keiyui, Wei, Genggeng, Lu, Zhengquan, Xiong, Lin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10685477/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38017464
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-023-01369-5
_version_ 1785151639961731072
author Liao, Sucai
Xu, Xiang
Yuan, Yuan
Tang, Keiyui
Wei, Genggeng
Lu, Zhengquan
Xiong, Lin
author_facet Liao, Sucai
Xu, Xiang
Yuan, Yuan
Tang, Keiyui
Wei, Genggeng
Lu, Zhengquan
Xiong, Lin
author_sort Liao, Sucai
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Patients with urosepsis associated with upper urinary tract stones require further stone management after emergency drainage. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of elective flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (F-URSL) for upper urinary tract stones in patients with prior urosepsis who have undergone emergency drainage using retrograde ureteral stent(RUS) or percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN). METHOD: Between January 2017 and December 2021, clinical data were collected for 102 patients who underwent elective F-URSL following emergency drainage for urosepsis caused by upper ureteral or renal stones. The patients were categorized into two groups based on the drainage method used: the RUS group and the PCN group. The collected data included patient demographics, stone parameters, infection recovery after emergency drainage, and clinical outcomes post F-URSL. Subsequently, the data underwent statistical analysis. RESULTS: A total of 102 patients were included in the statistical analysis, with 58 (56.86%) in the RUS group and 44 (43.14%) in the PCN group. Among the patients, 84 (82.35%) were female and 18 (17.65%) were male, with an average age of 59.36 years. Positive urine cultures were observed in 71 (69.61%) patients. Successful drainage was achieved in all patients in both groups, and there were no significant differences in the time required for normalization of white blood cell count (WBC) and body temperature following drainage. Additionally, all patients underwent F-URSL successfully, and no statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of operative time, stone-free rates, postoperative fever, and postoperative hospital stay. CONCLUSION: Both RUS and PCN have been established as effective approaches for managing urosepsis caused by upper urinary tract stones. Furthermore, the impact of these two drainage methods on the subsequent management of stones through elective F-URSL has shown consistent outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10685477
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106854772023-11-30 A comparative study of flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy for upper urinary tract stones in patients with prior urosepsis following emergency drainage via retrograde ureteral stent or percutaneous nephrostomy Liao, Sucai Xu, Xiang Yuan, Yuan Tang, Keiyui Wei, Genggeng Lu, Zhengquan Xiong, Lin BMC Urol Research BACKGROUND: Patients with urosepsis associated with upper urinary tract stones require further stone management after emergency drainage. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of elective flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (F-URSL) for upper urinary tract stones in patients with prior urosepsis who have undergone emergency drainage using retrograde ureteral stent(RUS) or percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN). METHOD: Between January 2017 and December 2021, clinical data were collected for 102 patients who underwent elective F-URSL following emergency drainage for urosepsis caused by upper ureteral or renal stones. The patients were categorized into two groups based on the drainage method used: the RUS group and the PCN group. The collected data included patient demographics, stone parameters, infection recovery after emergency drainage, and clinical outcomes post F-URSL. Subsequently, the data underwent statistical analysis. RESULTS: A total of 102 patients were included in the statistical analysis, with 58 (56.86%) in the RUS group and 44 (43.14%) in the PCN group. Among the patients, 84 (82.35%) were female and 18 (17.65%) were male, with an average age of 59.36 years. Positive urine cultures were observed in 71 (69.61%) patients. Successful drainage was achieved in all patients in both groups, and there were no significant differences in the time required for normalization of white blood cell count (WBC) and body temperature following drainage. Additionally, all patients underwent F-URSL successfully, and no statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of operative time, stone-free rates, postoperative fever, and postoperative hospital stay. CONCLUSION: Both RUS and PCN have been established as effective approaches for managing urosepsis caused by upper urinary tract stones. Furthermore, the impact of these two drainage methods on the subsequent management of stones through elective F-URSL has shown consistent outcomes. BioMed Central 2023-11-28 /pmc/articles/PMC10685477/ /pubmed/38017464 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-023-01369-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Liao, Sucai
Xu, Xiang
Yuan, Yuan
Tang, Keiyui
Wei, Genggeng
Lu, Zhengquan
Xiong, Lin
A comparative study of flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy for upper urinary tract stones in patients with prior urosepsis following emergency drainage via retrograde ureteral stent or percutaneous nephrostomy
title A comparative study of flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy for upper urinary tract stones in patients with prior urosepsis following emergency drainage via retrograde ureteral stent or percutaneous nephrostomy
title_full A comparative study of flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy for upper urinary tract stones in patients with prior urosepsis following emergency drainage via retrograde ureteral stent or percutaneous nephrostomy
title_fullStr A comparative study of flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy for upper urinary tract stones in patients with prior urosepsis following emergency drainage via retrograde ureteral stent or percutaneous nephrostomy
title_full_unstemmed A comparative study of flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy for upper urinary tract stones in patients with prior urosepsis following emergency drainage via retrograde ureteral stent or percutaneous nephrostomy
title_short A comparative study of flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy for upper urinary tract stones in patients with prior urosepsis following emergency drainage via retrograde ureteral stent or percutaneous nephrostomy
title_sort comparative study of flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy for upper urinary tract stones in patients with prior urosepsis following emergency drainage via retrograde ureteral stent or percutaneous nephrostomy
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10685477/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38017464
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-023-01369-5
work_keys_str_mv AT liaosucai acomparativestudyofflexibleureteroscopiclithotripsyforupperurinarytractstonesinpatientswithpriorurosepsisfollowingemergencydrainageviaretrogradeureteralstentorpercutaneousnephrostomy
AT xuxiang acomparativestudyofflexibleureteroscopiclithotripsyforupperurinarytractstonesinpatientswithpriorurosepsisfollowingemergencydrainageviaretrogradeureteralstentorpercutaneousnephrostomy
AT yuanyuan acomparativestudyofflexibleureteroscopiclithotripsyforupperurinarytractstonesinpatientswithpriorurosepsisfollowingemergencydrainageviaretrogradeureteralstentorpercutaneousnephrostomy
AT tangkeiyui acomparativestudyofflexibleureteroscopiclithotripsyforupperurinarytractstonesinpatientswithpriorurosepsisfollowingemergencydrainageviaretrogradeureteralstentorpercutaneousnephrostomy
AT weigenggeng acomparativestudyofflexibleureteroscopiclithotripsyforupperurinarytractstonesinpatientswithpriorurosepsisfollowingemergencydrainageviaretrogradeureteralstentorpercutaneousnephrostomy
AT luzhengquan acomparativestudyofflexibleureteroscopiclithotripsyforupperurinarytractstonesinpatientswithpriorurosepsisfollowingemergencydrainageviaretrogradeureteralstentorpercutaneousnephrostomy
AT xionglin acomparativestudyofflexibleureteroscopiclithotripsyforupperurinarytractstonesinpatientswithpriorurosepsisfollowingemergencydrainageviaretrogradeureteralstentorpercutaneousnephrostomy
AT liaosucai comparativestudyofflexibleureteroscopiclithotripsyforupperurinarytractstonesinpatientswithpriorurosepsisfollowingemergencydrainageviaretrogradeureteralstentorpercutaneousnephrostomy
AT xuxiang comparativestudyofflexibleureteroscopiclithotripsyforupperurinarytractstonesinpatientswithpriorurosepsisfollowingemergencydrainageviaretrogradeureteralstentorpercutaneousnephrostomy
AT yuanyuan comparativestudyofflexibleureteroscopiclithotripsyforupperurinarytractstonesinpatientswithpriorurosepsisfollowingemergencydrainageviaretrogradeureteralstentorpercutaneousnephrostomy
AT tangkeiyui comparativestudyofflexibleureteroscopiclithotripsyforupperurinarytractstonesinpatientswithpriorurosepsisfollowingemergencydrainageviaretrogradeureteralstentorpercutaneousnephrostomy
AT weigenggeng comparativestudyofflexibleureteroscopiclithotripsyforupperurinarytractstonesinpatientswithpriorurosepsisfollowingemergencydrainageviaretrogradeureteralstentorpercutaneousnephrostomy
AT luzhengquan comparativestudyofflexibleureteroscopiclithotripsyforupperurinarytractstonesinpatientswithpriorurosepsisfollowingemergencydrainageviaretrogradeureteralstentorpercutaneousnephrostomy
AT xionglin comparativestudyofflexibleureteroscopiclithotripsyforupperurinarytractstonesinpatientswithpriorurosepsisfollowingemergencydrainageviaretrogradeureteralstentorpercutaneousnephrostomy