User Guide
Why can I only view 3 results?
You can also view all results when you are connected from the network of member institutions only. For non-member institutions, we are opening a 1-month free trial version if institution officials apply.
So many results that aren't mine?
References in many bibliographies are sometimes referred to as "Surname, I", so the citations of academics whose Surname and initials are the same may occasionally interfere. This problem is often the case with citation indexes all over the world.
How can I see only citations to my article?
After searching the name of your article, you can see the references to the article you selected as soon as you click on the details section.
 Views 9
 Downloands 2
Üreter taşı lokalizasyonuna göre rijid üreteroskopinin başarısı
2010
Journal:  
Dicle Tıp Dergisi
Author:  
Abstract:

Objectives: We retrospectively evaluated our rigid uret­eroscopy (URS) treatment results in ureteric stones and assessed its effectiveness concerning ureteric stone lo­calisation. Materials and methods: Overall, 101 patients were ret­rospectively evaluated including lower (n=69), mid (n=23) and upper ureteric (n=9) stones which were treated with rigid URS (Wolf 8.0-9.8Fr, Germany) in our hospital be­tween January 2007- June 2009. Stones were removed by stone forceps/basket catheter either as single piece or fragmented by pneumatic lithotripsy (EMS-Swisslitho­clast-Master). Results: Mean patient age was 45.1 (19-78) years. Stones were located in the right (n=52) and left (n=49) ure­ters, respectively. Mean stone size was 7,4 mm (5-15). Of the 9 patients with upper ureteric stones, 7 were (77.8%) stone-free. However, stone migrated into renal pelvis in two patients but passed into ureter again in the follow-up and removed by URS. Of the 23 patients with mid-ureteric stones, 22 were (95.7%) stone-free. Ureter perforation occurred in one patient and ureteroneocystostomy was performed. Of the 69 patients with lower ureteric stones, 68 were (98.6%) stone-free. Ureter perforation occurred in one patient and healed spontaneously by ureter cathe­ter replacement. Stone was removed afterwards by URS. Overall (n=101), ureter perforation occurred in 1.9% (n=2) in our series. Resistant urinary tract infection developed in one patient (0.9%) (P.aeroginosa). Conclusion: Due to results of this preliminary study, rigid URS and pneumatic lithotripsy can be performed suc­cessfully particularly in lower ureteric stones. However, as stone location shifts to upper ureter, success rate de­creases. Although URS can be performed safely with low complication rates in the treatment of ureteric stones, se­vere complications like ureter perforation might occur.

Keywords:

Producer stone localization according to the success of rijid ureteroscopy
2010
Journal:  
Dicle Tıp Dergisi
Author:  
Abstract:

Objectives: We retrospectively evaluated our rigid ureteroscopy (URS) treatment results in ureteric stones and assessed its effectiveness concerning ureteric stone localization. Materials and methods: Overall, 101 patients were retrospectively evaluated including lower (n=69), mid (n=23) and upper ureteric (n=9) stones which were treated with rigid URS (Wolf 8.0-9.8Fr, Germany) in our hospital between January 2007 and June 2009. Stones were removed by stone forceps/basket catheter either as a single piece or fragmented by pneumatic lithotripsy (EMS-Swisslithoclast-Master). Results: Mean patient age was 45.1 (19-78) years. Stones were located in the right (n=52) and left (n=49) ure­ters, respectively. Mean stone size was 7.4 mm (5-15). Of the 9 patients with upper ureteric stones, 7 were (77.8%) stone-free. However, stone migrated into the renal pelvis in two patients but passed into ureter again in the follow-up and removed by URS. Of the 23 patients with mid-ureteric stones, 22 were (95.7%) stone-free. Ureter perforation occurred in one patient and ureteroneocystostomy was performed. Of the 69 patients with lower ureteric stones, 68 were (98.6%) stone-free. Ureter perforation occurred in one patient and healed spontaneously by ureter catheter replacement. Stone was removed afterwards by URS. Overall (n=101), ureter perforation occurred in 1.9% (n=2) in our series. Resistant urinary tract infection developed in one patient (0.9%) (P.aeroginosa). Conclusion: Due to the results of this preliminary study, rigid URS and pneumatic lithotripsy can be performed successfully in lower ureteric stones. However, as stone location shifts to upper ureter, success rate decreases. Although URS can be performed safely with low complication rates in the treatment of ureteric stones, severe complications like ureter perforation might occur.

Keywords:

Citation Owners
Information: There is no ciation to this publication.
Similar Articles








Dicle Tıp Dergisi

Field :   Sağlık Bilimleri

Journal Type :   Uluslararası

Metrics
Article : 1.608
Cite : 3.099
2023 Impact : 0.081
Dicle Tıp Dergisi