FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2002172905> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2002172905 endingPage "1046" @default.
• W2002172905 startingPage "1043" @default.
• W2002172905 abstract "Objectives To compare the feasibility and morbidity of tubeless, totally tubeless, and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) with nephrostomy tube in a single center with selected patient population. Methods Between July 2006 and February 2008, PNL was performed in 176 patients in this retrospective study. Patients with no serious bleeding or perforation in the collecting system during the operation, stone-free status, or clinically insignificant residual fragments (<4 mm) at the end of the procedure and patients with no more than one access were enrolled in the study. Patients were categorized into 3 groups. In group 1 (n = 43), no nephrostomy or ureter catheters were placed after PNL (totally tubeless group); in group 2 (n = 41), no nephrostomy catheter was placed but antegrade J-stent was used (tubeless group), and in group 3 (n = 92), standard nephrostomy catheters were placed (standard group). Three groups were compared with respect to age, stone volume, postoperative hemoglobin change, transfusion rate, operation time, analgesic requirement, hospitalization time, and complication rates. Results No significant differences were found in mean stone volume, operation time, transfusion rates, and hemoglobin level change between the groups. However, hospitalization time and the amount of narcotic analgesic required were significantly higher in group 3 compared with the other groups (P <.05). Complications were observed in 2 (4.6%), 3 (7.3%), and 7 (7.6%) patients in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P = .738). Conclusions In patients with no major intraoperative bleeding and calyceal perforation, tubeless approach is safe with decreased analgesia requirement and hospital stay. To compare the feasibility and morbidity of tubeless, totally tubeless, and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) with nephrostomy tube in a single center with selected patient population. Between July 2006 and February 2008, PNL was performed in 176 patients in this retrospective study. Patients with no serious bleeding or perforation in the collecting system during the operation, stone-free status, or clinically insignificant residual fragments (<4 mm) at the end of the procedure and patients with no more than one access were enrolled in the study. Patients were categorized into 3 groups. In group 1 (n = 43), no nephrostomy or ureter catheters were placed after PNL (totally tubeless group); in group 2 (n = 41), no nephrostomy catheter was placed but antegrade J-stent was used (tubeless group), and in group 3 (n = 92), standard nephrostomy catheters were placed (standard group). Three groups were compared with respect to age, stone volume, postoperative hemoglobin change, transfusion rate, operation time, analgesic requirement, hospitalization time, and complication rates. No significant differences were found in mean stone volume, operation time, transfusion rates, and hemoglobin level change between the groups. However, hospitalization time and the amount of narcotic analgesic required were significantly higher in group 3 compared with the other groups (P <.05). Complications were observed in 2 (4.6%), 3 (7.3%), and 7 (7.6%) patients in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P = .738). In patients with no major intraoperative bleeding and calyceal perforation, tubeless approach is safe with decreased analgesia requirement and hospital stay." @default.
• W2002172905 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2002172905 creator A5019568613 @default.
• W2002172905 creator A5026955945 @default.
• W2002172905 creator A5049324114 @default.
• W2002172905 creator A5056559970 @default.
• W2002172905 creator A5077295982 @default.
• W2002172905 date "2010-05-01" @default.
• W2002172905 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W2002172905 title "Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Nephrostomy or Tubeless or Totally Tubeless?" @default.
• W2002172905 cites W1984819895 @default.
• W2002172905 cites W1986932706 @default.
• W2002172905 cites W1988144512 @default.
• W2002172905 cites W1993374410 @default.
• W2002172905 cites W1996110126 @default.
• W2002172905 cites W1996340278 @default.
• W2002172905 cites W2015035431 @default.
• W2002172905 cites W2016361123 @default.
• W2002172905 cites W2018163052 @default.
• W2002172905 cites W2031078344 @default.
• W2002172905 cites W2049339270 @default.
• W2002172905 cites W2058301714 @default.
• W2002172905 cites W2063858085 @default.
• W2002172905 cites W2072905182 @default.
• W2002172905 cites W2082918734 @default.
• W2002172905 cites W2083792600 @default.
• W2002172905 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2009.06.104" @default.
• W2002172905 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19854490" @default.
• W2002172905 hasPublicationYear "2010" @default.
• W2002172905 type Work @default.
• W2002172905 sameAs 2002172905 @default.
• W2002172905 citedByCount "65" @default.
• W2002172905 countsByYear W20021729052012 @default.
• W2002172905 countsByYear W20021729052013 @default.
• W2002172905 countsByYear W20021729052014 @default.
• W2002172905 countsByYear W20021729052015 @default.
• W2002172905 countsByYear W20021729052016 @default.
• W2002172905 countsByYear W20021729052017 @default.
• W2002172905 countsByYear W20021729052018 @default.
• W2002172905 countsByYear W20021729052019 @default.
• W2002172905 countsByYear W20021729052020 @default.
• W2002172905 countsByYear W20021729052021 @default.
• W2002172905 countsByYear W20021729052022 @default.
• W2002172905 countsByYear W20021729052023 @default.
• W2002172905 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2002172905 hasAuthorship W2002172905A5019568613 @default.
• W2002172905 hasAuthorship W2002172905A5026955945 @default.
• W2002172905 hasAuthorship W2002172905A5049324114 @default.
• W2002172905 hasAuthorship W2002172905A5056559970 @default.
• W2002172905 hasAuthorship W2002172905A5077295982 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConcept C191897082 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConcept C192562407 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConcept C2778261594 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConcept C2778456384 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConcept C2778527123 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConcept C2780374147 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConcept C2780813298 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConcept C2780885103 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConceptScore W2002172905C141071460 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConceptScore W2002172905C191897082 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConceptScore W2002172905C192562407 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConceptScore W2002172905C2778261594 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConceptScore W2002172905C2778456384 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConceptScore W2002172905C2778527123 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConceptScore W2002172905C2780374147 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConceptScore W2002172905C2780813298 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConceptScore W2002172905C2780885103 @default.
• W2002172905 hasConceptScore W2002172905C71924100 @default.
• W2002172905 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W2002172905 hasLocation W20021729051 @default.
• W2002172905 hasLocation W20021729052 @default.
• W2002172905 hasOpenAccess W2002172905 @default.
• W2002172905 hasPrimaryLocation W20021729051 @default.
• W2002172905 hasRelatedWork W140735423 @default.
• W2002172905 hasRelatedWork W1988017829 @default.
• W2002172905 hasRelatedWork W1989664837 @default.
• W2002172905 hasRelatedWork W2032707532 @default.
• W2002172905 hasRelatedWork W2155950618 @default.
• W2002172905 hasRelatedWork W2368126254 @default.
• W2002172905 hasRelatedWork W2407639824 @default.
• W2002172905 hasRelatedWork W2464195109 @default.
• W2002172905 hasRelatedWork W2909959995 @default.
• W2002172905 hasRelatedWork W3196121666 @default.
• W2002172905 hasVolume "75" @default.
• W2002172905 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2002172905 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2002172905 magId "2002172905" @default.
• W2002172905 workType "article" @default.