Home > Journals > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica > Past Issues > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2019 August;71(4) > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2019 August;71(4):413-20

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLE   

Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2019 August;71(4):413-20

DOI: 10.23736/S0393-2249.19.03356-3

Copyright © 2019 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

The effect of using ureteral access sheath for treatment of impacted ureteral stones at mid-upper part with flexible ureterorenoscopy: a randomized prospective study

Fatih ÖZKAYA 1 , Zülfü SERTKAYA 2, İbrahim KARABULUT 3, Yılmaz AKSOY 1

1 Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Ataturk University, Erzurum, Turkey; 2 Department of Urology, Dicle Memorial Hospital, Diyarbakır, Turkey; 3 Department of Urology, Erzurum Regional Training and Research Hospital, Health Science University, Erzurum, Turkey



BACKGROUND: The number of the studies made on the efficacy of flexible ureteroscopy (FURS) with ureteral access sheath (UAS) for impacted ureteral stones is limited. The aim of our study was to compare the efficacy and reliability of FURS in treatment of mid-upper impacted ureteral stones in cases where access is used or not.
METHODS: Between January 2017 and June 2018, 131 adult patients who applied to our clinic with complaints of mid-upper impacted ureteral stones. Patients were randomized as group 1 (without UAS) and group 2 (with UAS) by means of a draw and assessed in terms of demographic features, stone size, stone localization, hydronephrosis grade, operation time, scope time, the need for additional surgery, hospitalization time and complications.
RESULTS: The mean age of the patients in group 1 was 45.01 years (19-76) and was 37.01 years (16-80) in group 2. Mean stone size was 9.04 mm2 and 9.77 mm2 in group 1 and 2, respectively. Additional treatment was required for 26 (42.6%) patients in group 1 and 8 (11.4%) in group 2. No major intraoperative and postoperative complications developed in both groups. Although bleeding as a postoperative complication rate was similar, fever (>38° C) and urinary tract infection were higher in group 1 than in group 2.
CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of mid-upper impacted ureteral stones, using UAS during the application of FURS is an advantageous procedure due to shorter operation time, fever intraoperative stone migrations and the need for additional surgery, less postoperative infection.


KEY WORDS: Ureteral calculi; Ureteroscopy; Urology

top of page