FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2799693571> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2799693571 abstract "Background: nephrolithiasis is a common complex disease. It is the third most common disaster of the urinary tract, exceeded only by urinary tract infections and pathologic conditions of the prostate. About 50 % of recurrent stone formers have just one life time recurrence. At present, the great expansion in minimally invasive techniques has led to the decrease in open stone surgery (OSS). Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) has been introduced as an alternative approach which disintegrates stones in the kidney and upper urinary tract through the use of shock waves (SWs). Nevertheless, as there are limitations with the success rate in ESWL, other minimally invasive modalities for kidney stones such as percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) are considered.Aim of the work: this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of ESWL VS PNL in management of non-lower polar medium sized stone (1-2 cm) as regards to stone size, location and number.Patients and Methods: this is a prospective randomized comparative clinical study that was conducted in Ain Shams Urology Department and Agouza Hospital Urology Department from December 2016 till September 2017.Sixty patients were enrolled; of which 30 patients underwent PNL and other 30 patients underwent Non-stented ESWL complaining of non-lower polar medium sized calyceal stones (1-2 cm). All patients were categorized into two subgroups; group A for ESWL and group B for PNL. Patients with lower calyceal stones, stone burden more than 2 cm, recurrent kidney stones, renal impairment, pregnant women and children were excluded from this study. Our study included 45 males (75%) and 15 females (25%) with a mean ± SD age 43.78±12.68 years (range 25 to 65). The patients’ criteria (age, sex, body mass index) and the stone characteristics (side, stone size, attenuation value and skin- to-stone distance) were compared between both groups. The SFR rate, the need for secondary procedures were calculated and compared.Results: 30 patients underwent PNL and the other 30 patients underwent Non-Stented ESWL. Twenty nine patients (96.6%) who underwent PNL rendered SFR detected by Non-enhanced Helical CT (Less than 4 mm) after one month; two cases 2 mm and 3 mm CIRF and only one case with 4 mm residual whereas only 5 patients (16.7%) in the ESWL group with high significance (P < 0.001) and all patients in PNL group were completed stone clearance without auxiliary procedure (p< 0.001).Conclusion: PNL is the modality of choice in medium sized (1-2cm) lower calyceal renal stone. PNL was more effective than ESWL for treating medium sized (1-2 cm) non lower polar renal stone, it has advantages of higher initial SFR with short time of treatment and lower auxiliary procedures (lower retreatment rate).However, ESWL was associated with fewer complications." @default.
• W2799693571 created "2018-05-17" @default.
• W2799693571 creator A5003649686 @default.
• W2799693571 creator A5012625357 @default.
• W2799693571 creator A5047529055 @default.
• W2799693571 date "2018-01-01" @default.
• W2799693571 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W2799693571 title "Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy versus Non-Stented Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Medium Sized Kidney Stones" @default.
• W2799693571 cites W1236439116 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W1953832888 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W1967693462 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W1969801753 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W1982348524 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W2005668029 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W2042406812 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W2059974816 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W2064761039 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W2080139363 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W2087102928 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W2091079332 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W2093992980 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W2147573016 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W2150698663 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W2160241148 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W2160932242 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W2362234203 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W2408647922 @default.
• W2799693571 cites W2592786577 @default.
• W2799693571 doi "https://doi.org/10.12816/0043083" @default.
• W2799693571 hasPublicationYear "2018" @default.
• W2799693571 type Work @default.
• W2799693571 sameAs 2799693571 @default.
• W2799693571 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2799693571 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2799693571 hasAuthorship W2799693571A5003649686 @default.
• W2799693571 hasAuthorship W2799693571A5012625357 @default.
• W2799693571 hasAuthorship W2799693571A5047529055 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConcept C126894567 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConcept C2777756408 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConcept C2777950166 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConcept C2779403450 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConcept C2780813298 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConcept C2780885103 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConcept C2993461684 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConcept C54847362 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConcept C77411442 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConceptScore W2799693571C126322002 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConceptScore W2799693571C126894567 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConceptScore W2799693571C141071460 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConceptScore W2799693571C2777756408 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConceptScore W2799693571C2777950166 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConceptScore W2799693571C2779403450 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConceptScore W2799693571C2780813298 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConceptScore W2799693571C2780885103 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConceptScore W2799693571C2993461684 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConceptScore W2799693571C54847362 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConceptScore W2799693571C71924100 @default.
• W2799693571 hasConceptScore W2799693571C77411442 @default.
• W2799693571 hasLocation W27996935711 @default.
• W2799693571 hasOpenAccess W2799693571 @default.
• W2799693571 hasPrimaryLocation W27996935711 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W1578156334 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W1747855568 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W2058404504 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W2070258965 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W2274918265 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W2349123646 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W2369501227 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W2420491666 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W2765226528 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W2784286604 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W2910364191 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W2954511664 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W2961718172 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W2992196633 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W3106011628 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W3106136357 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W3163503689 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W3183181280 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W3187538945 @default.
• W2799693571 hasRelatedWork W1716506666 @default.
• W2799693571 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2799693571 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2799693571 magId "2799693571" @default.
• W2799693571 workType "article" @default.