Search

Objective: To analyze the effect of the anesthesia method (spinal and general) on the outcome of ureteroscopy (URS) in patients treated for proximal ureteral stones. Materials and Methods: Patients, who underwent URS for proximal ureteral stones at various urology clinics in Turkiye, were included in the study. The patients were divided into two groups according to the anesthesia method performed; the procedure was performed under spinal anesthesia (SA) in group 1 and general anesthesia (GA) in group 2. Patients' demographic, perioperative data and complication rates were compared between the two groups in a retrospective manner. Results: There were 309 and 329 patients in groups 1 and 2, respectively. The mean stone area and Hounsfield unit in GA group were higher (p<0.001 and p=0.007, respectively). In the GA group, the need for double J stent was more frequent (p<0.001). In the SA group, the rate of push-back of stone into the collecting system was higher (p=0.017). According to the Clavien classification system and the others, complication rates were similar between the two groups (p>0.05). The rate of success of URS, which is accepted as complete stone-free status, was higher in the SA group (p=0.041). Conclusion: URS, which is used in the treatment of proximal ureteral stones, has a high success rate, independent of the anesthesia method used. It is important to keep in mind the patient's comorbidities prior to selecting the anesthesia method and that the stone area and the Hounsfield unit are the important factors affecting the outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study evaluates the effectiveness of CHOKAI and STONE scores in patients presenting to the emergency department with ureteral stones., Methods: Patients over the age of 18 who were admitted to the emergency department with flank pain, groin pain, scrotal pain, and hematuria and who were performed non-contrast abdominal computed tomography (CT) for diagnostic imaging were included. The numeric pain, CHOKAI, and STONE scores of the patients were calculated. The effectiveness of these scoring systems in the presence of stones was examined., Results: A total of 105 patients were included in the study. In the analysis performed to investigate whether there was a difference between the numeric pain, STONE, and CHOKAI scores in terms of the presence of stones on CT, it was seen that the CHOKAI score was significantly different from the others (p < 0.001). A significant positive correlation was found between the CHOKAI score and stone size (r = 0.343, p < 0.001).When the cut-off value of the CHOKAI score was >7, the sensitivity was found to be 60.49%, and specificity was 83.33%. The cut-off value for the STONE score was >8 with a sensitivity of 70.37% and specificity of 58.33%. The corresponding area under curve values for the CHOHAI and STONE scores was 0.788 (p < 0.0001) and 0.615 (p = 0.087). Male sex, the CHOKAI, and STONE scores were the independent risk factors for ureteral stone. A significant positive correlation was found between the CHOKAI score and stone size (r = 0.343, p < 0.001)., Conclusion: The CHOKAI score has a higher performance than the STONE score in detecting the presence of ureteral stones., New Knowledge Added by This Study: The CHOKAI score has a higher performance than the STONE score in detecting the presence of ureteral stones. Especially in countries such as Turkey, where there are no specific racial differences, the STONE score may be diagnostically insufficient. The CHOKAI score shows the presence of the patient's stone and positively correlates with the size of the stone and the stone location., Implication for Clinical Practice or Policy: In the functioning of the emergency department, it is important to make the differential diagnosis of patients quickly and provide effective treatment. The use of diagnostic scoring systems saves time for the emergency physician in the differential diagnosis phase and guides in terms of applying for possible additional imaging methods., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest There is no conflict of interest between authors., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Ureteral stone disease may be an emergent condition if the appropriate management is not performed in a timely manner. As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to spread globally, isolation and restriction orders taken by the governments have become the cores to control the pandemic. In this study, we, therefore, aimed to investigate the ureteral stone presentations in a high-volume university hospital during the COVID-19 restriction order period. Materials and Methods: The data of 149 patients who were hospitalized due to ureteral stone both during the COVID-19 pandemic restriction period and the corresponding period (non-COVID-19) of the previous year were collected and analyzed retrospectively. Unpaired Student's t -test was used to compare continuous variables. The categorical data were assessed using Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. Results: Of 149 patients, 35 were hospitalized in the COVID-19 restrictions period. While the mean age and the stone characteristics of the two groups did not differ significantly, serum creatinine levels (1.9 ± 1.85 vs 1.15 ± 0.64) and the white blood cell counts (12.45 ± 6.54 vs 8.21 ± 4.15) at hospital admission were significantly higher in the COVID-19 restrictions group ( p  = 0.034 and p  = 0.005, respectively). According to the priority classification recommendations of the European Urology Guidelines Office Rapid Reaction Group for urolithiasis applicable during the COVID-19 pandemic, a significant difference was observed between the two periods ( X 2  = 9.907, p The rate of complicated ureteral stone disease significantly increased during the COVID-19 restrictions period. Urologists should prioritize the patients most in need of urgent care during COVID-19-like biosocial crisis. Conclusion: The rate of complicated ureteral stone disease significantly increased during the COVID-19 restrictions period. Urologists should prioritize the patients most in need of urgent care during COVID-19-like biosocial crisis.

Purpose: To investigate the factors that predict the success and complication rates of semi-rigid ureteroscopy (URS) in pediatric population., Materials and Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of the database including 182 patients who underwent URS between 2001 and 2016. The possible factors that might affect the outcome were age, gender, stone laterality, largest stone size, number of stones, stone location, orifice dilatation status, and caliber of ureteroscope., Results: The mean age was 68.1 (7-204) months, and male-to-female ratio was 94:88. Operative side was left for 97, right for 82, and bilateral for 3 patients. One hundred and forty-four patients had a single stone, and 38 patients had multiple stones. The median largest stone size was 7 (2-20) mm. Postoperative ureteral stenting was performed in 150 (86.2%) patients. The overall success rate was 84.6%, while 81.6% and 85.4% in 8F URS and 4.5F URS groups, respectively (p = 0.560). Stone-free rate was higher among patients who were older than 36 months, distal ureteral stones and single stones (p = 0.012, 0.002, and 0.009, respectively). Complication rate was higher for proximally located stones (p = 0.029). The mean follow-up was 23.9 ± 32.5 months., Conclusion: URS is a safe procedure with acceptable success rates in the pediatric population. Younger age, multiple stones, and proximal location are the predisposing factors for failure, whereas proximal location was the only factor for complication occurrence. Therefore, semi-rigid ureteroscopy should not be the first choice in the treatment of proximal ureteral stones, and alternative methods should be preferred, if available.

Background: In recent years, the incidence of urinary stone disease reportedly has been increasing. The use of shockwave lithotripsy has seen low success rates, the inefficacy of a single session, and the need for general anaesthesia in children; additionally, children are exposed to radiation. These suboptimal treatment conditions have all led to ureteroscopy (URS) becoming the treatment method of choice for paediatric ureter stones. The aim of this study is to examine the effectiveness of 4.5-Fr URS when used on children younger than 1 year of age., Patients and Methods: The operation results of 34 patients (12 girls and 22 boys) who had undergone intervention for ureter stones at our clinic were retrospectively evaluated. For URS, a 4.5-Fr semi-rigid ureteroscope was used; a Holmium:YAG laser machine was used as a lithotripter., Result: The mean patient age was 9.6 months (range 4-12 months) (Table). The mean stone surface area was 25.39 mm 2 (range 11.84-84.78 mm 2 ). In six cases, a ureteral catheter was inserted, because of minimal oedema in the ureters; in nine cases, a Double J (DJ) stent was inserted. The mean operation time was 45.3 min (range 22-87 min). In the first week of control with urinary ultrasonography and kidney-ureter and bladder radiograph, a stone-free condition was determined in 28 (82.3%) patients. In two cases-in which sufficient fragmentation could not be achieved, because of minimal bleeding during operation-during the exertion of a DJ stent, another URS was performed. In the first postoperative month, a stone-free condition was established in 32 (94.1%) patients. The mean hospital stay period was 28.6 h (range 12-72 h). There were seven cases (20.5%) with Clavien II-III complications., Conclusion: Use of a ureteroscope is safe and effective with paediatric patients: we found that a 4.5-Fr ureteroscope can be safely used on children under 1 year of age. We therefore consider a 4.5-Fr ureteroscopic instrument to be an appropriate tool for treating URS in children within this age range., (Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)