FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3197357130> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3197357130 abstract "Abstract Background Current options for ureteral stones include medical treatment, extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), and various endoscopic procedures, with the standard open ureterolithotomy being less frequently practiced nowadays. The use of laparoscopy in the management of ureteral stones was one of the earliest applications of laparoscopy in urology, the first report being made by Wickham in 1979. Objective To compare the laparoscopic Retroperitoneal ureterolithotomy with the Laparoscopic Transperitoneal ureterolithotomy as a better alternative to conventional open surgery to extract a large, impacted and hard stones at the proximal two thirds of the ureter. Methods In this study we present our experience with laparoscopic ureterolithotomy comparing both transperitoneal approach and retroperitoneal approach through a retrospective randomized comparative study that conducted on 50 patients admitted through the outpatient clinic of Urology in Ain shams University Hospitals and Nasser institute hospital. The 50 patients divided into two groups each one was 25 patients, first group was performed by the laparoscopic transperitoneal approach and the other group by the laparoscopic retroperitoneal approach Between October 2017 and October 2018. Results This study revealed that the length of the Hospitalization period and the duration of drainage and urethral catheter were shorter in the transperitoneal approach than in the retroperitoneal approach with statistical significance between the groups. In the present study, the mean time to oral intake was significantly shorter in the Retroperitoneal group than in the Transperitoneal group. This is due to the mobilization of the colon, dissection and retraction of the viscera, and blood and urine leak in the peritoneal cavity, causing intestinal movements and sounds to be more delayed in the LTU group. In contrast, the lost blood during the retroperitoneal procedure does not come into contact with the bowel, and if urine leakage occurs, it would be contained within the retroperitoneal space. Also we find that both approaches are safe with few complications that were significantly wider at the transperitoneal group; vascular injury didn’t occur at any of the cases with no need for blood transfusion. Conclusion Through our study we concluded that Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy is technically feasible and safe and both of its two approaches either transperitoneal or retroperitoneal are successful procedures with a success rate nearly the same in both techniques, but and based on our results through this study, we recommend the retroperitoneal approach for laparoscpic extraction of the ureteral stones due to the fact that it has the least operative time than the transperitoneal approach, getting rid of the all stone burden, lower rate of complications and a better postoperative recovery." @default.
• W3197357130 created "2021-09-13" @default.
• W3197357130 creator A5024302194 @default.
• W3197357130 creator A5026841521 @default.
• W3197357130 creator A5057808676 @default.
• W3197357130 date "2020-03-01" @default.
• W3197357130 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
• W3197357130 title "Retroperitoneal versus Transperitoneal Laparoscopic approach for Management of Upper Ureteric Stones" @default.
• W3197357130 doi "https://doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hcaa070.001" @default.
• W3197357130 hasPublicationYear "2020" @default.
• W3197357130 type Work @default.
• W3197357130 sameAs 3197357130 @default.
• W3197357130 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W3197357130 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3197357130 hasAuthorship W3197357130A5024302194 @default.
• W3197357130 hasAuthorship W3197357130A5026841521 @default.
• W3197357130 hasAuthorship W3197357130A5057808676 @default.
• W3197357130 hasBestOaLocation W31973571301 @default.
• W3197357130 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W3197357130 hasConcept C2775862295 @default.
• W3197357130 hasConcept C2776664737 @default.
• W3197357130 hasConcept C2780047204 @default.
• W3197357130 hasConcept C61434518 @default.
• W3197357130 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W3197357130 hasConceptScore W3197357130C141071460 @default.
• W3197357130 hasConceptScore W3197357130C2775862295 @default.
• W3197357130 hasConceptScore W3197357130C2776664737 @default.
• W3197357130 hasConceptScore W3197357130C2780047204 @default.
• W3197357130 hasConceptScore W3197357130C61434518 @default.
• W3197357130 hasConceptScore W3197357130C71924100 @default.
• W3197357130 hasIssue "Supplement_1" @default.
• W3197357130 hasLocation W31973571301 @default.
• W3197357130 hasOpenAccess W3197357130 @default.
• W3197357130 hasPrimaryLocation W31973571301 @default.
• W3197357130 hasRelatedWork W107180853 @default.
• W3197357130 hasRelatedWork W2064710029 @default.
• W3197357130 hasRelatedWork W2131834835 @default.
• W3197357130 hasRelatedWork W2140648138 @default.
• W3197357130 hasRelatedWork W2241237111 @default.
• W3197357130 hasRelatedWork W2312626535 @default.
• W3197357130 hasRelatedWork W2317109297 @default.
• W3197357130 hasRelatedWork W2390961722 @default.
• W3197357130 hasRelatedWork W2399601075 @default.
• W3197357130 hasRelatedWork W2945448445 @default.
• W3197357130 hasVolume "113" @default.
• W3197357130 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3197357130 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3197357130 magId "3197357130" @default.
• W3197357130 workType "article" @default.