Detailed Information on Publication Record
2018
Worldwide Use of Antiretropulsive Techniques: Observations from the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society Ureteroscopy Global Study
SAUSSINE, C., S. ANDONIAN, Dalibor PACÍK, M. POPIOLEK, A. CELIA et. al.Basic information
Original name
Worldwide Use of Antiretropulsive Techniques: Observations from the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society Ureteroscopy Global Study
Authors
SAUSSINE, C. (250 France), S. ANDONIAN (124 Canada), Dalibor PACÍK (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution), M. POPIOLEK (752 Sweden), A. CELIA (380 Italy), N. BUCHHOLZ (784 United Arab Emirates), P. SOUNTOULIDES (300 Greece), B. PETRUT (642 Romania) and Jean J.M.C.H. DE LA ROSETTE (528 Netherlands, guarantor)
Edition
Journal of endourology. New York, Mary Ann Liebert Inc. 2018, 0892-7790
Other information
Language
English
Type of outcome
Článek v odborném periodiku
Field of Study
30217 Urology and nephrology
Country of publisher
United States of America
Confidentiality degree
není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství
Impact factor
Impact factor: 2.267
RIV identification code
RIV/00216224:14110/18:00102913
Organization unit
Faculty of Medicine
UT WoS
000422642200001
Keywords in English
antiretropulsion; migration; ureteroscopy; stone cone; Ntrap; basket
Tags
International impact, Reviewed
Změněno: 11/2/2019 16:03, Soňa Böhmová
Abstract
V originále
Introduction: Retropulsion, defined as unintended migration of a stone under the influence of the fragmentation device in ureteroscopy (URS) procedures, occurs in 2% to 60% of the cases. Antiretropulsive devices (ARDs) have been studied in experimental and small clinical studies. The current study aims at describing the worldwide usage of ARD and the outcomes related to their usage. Methods: The Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society URS Global Study enrolled 11,885 patients who underwent URS and stone fragmentation for ureteral and/or renal stones. Of the 11,885 treated patients, 9877 were treated for ureteral stones, and data were available on stone migration and ARD use. Results: Of all procedures, 14.5% were performed with the use of an ARD. Less stone migration (-2.0%; p=0.050), higher stone-free rates (SFRs) (2.8%; p<0.001), and shorter length of stay (-4.7%; p=0.001) were observed in the antiretropulsive group. Conclusions: When an ARD is used during URS, less migration, higher SFRs, and shorter length of hospital stay are observed. This effect is independent from baseline differences and corrected for other treatment characteristics.