FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4248751261> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4248751261 abstract "You have accessJournal of UrologyStone Disease: Shock Wave Lithotripsy (PD26)1 Apr 2019PD26-05 INITIAL EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCKWAVE LITHOTRIPSY VERSUS URETEROSCOPY: A RETREATMENT AND COST ANALYSIS USING A LONGITUDINAL, POPULATION-BASED DATABASE Marc Nelson*, Parth Patel, Amanda Garza, Emanuel Eguia, Patrick Sweigert, Marshall Baker, Gopal Gupta, Ahmer Farooq, Thomas Turk, and Kristin G. Baldea Marc Nelson*Marc Nelson* More articles by this author , Parth PatelParth Patel More articles by this author , Amanda GarzaAmanda Garza More articles by this author , Emanuel EguiaEmanuel Eguia More articles by this author , Patrick SweigertPatrick Sweigert More articles by this author , Marshall BakerMarshall Baker More articles by this author , Gopal GuptaGopal Gupta More articles by this author , Ahmer FarooqAhmer Farooq More articles by this author , Thomas TurkThomas Turk More articles by this author , and Kristin G. BaldeaKristin G. Baldea More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0000555926.82877.fdAboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) and flexible ureterorenoscopy (URS) are first-line treatment options for uncomplicated nephroureterolithiasis. It is well established that stone-free rates are higher for those undergoing URS. Given the variable definitions for stone-free, however, an analysis of retreatment rates in clinical practice is necessary to truly evaluate the effectiveness of the two modalities. Furthermore, an accurate understanding of the treatment costs is paramount in today’s cost-conscious healthcare environment. METHODS: The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Ambulatory Surgery Database for Florida from 2010-2015 was utilized. CPT codes were used to identify patients who underwent initial ESWL or URS. Patients were tracked longitudinally for subsequent stone surgeries within 90 days. Costs of care were estimated from reported charges by applying hospital-specific cost to charge ratios. Descriptive analyses were performed. A multivariable logistic regression model was utilized to determine predictors of a second stone operation within 90 days. RESULTS: 98,011 patients underwent initial ESWL or URS. 21.2% of those who underwent initial ESWL had a second stone surgery within 90 days, vs. 10.1% of patients who underwent initial URS (p<0.005) (Table 1) On multivariate analysis, initial ESWL results in a more than 2-fold increased odds of a second procedure within 90 days compared to initial URS (OR 2.40, p<0.005). Older patients had an increased odds risk of undergoing a second surgery (Age 50-70 OR 1.46, p<0.005) while Black race (OR 0.92, p=0.032) Hispanic race (OR 0.83, p<0.005) and those with higher comorbidity scores (CCI>=3 OR 0.68, p<0.005) had decreased odds of second surgery. The per-patient 90 day cost was $6239 for initial ESWL and $5319 for initial URS (p < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: ESWL results in higher retreatment rates and is more costly than URS. Further comparison studies should be performed to confirm these findings. Source of Funding: none Maywood, IL© 2019 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 201Issue Supplement 4April 2019Page: e476-e476 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2019 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Marc Nelson* More articles by this author Parth Patel More articles by this author Amanda Garza More articles by this author Emanuel Eguia More articles by this author Patrick Sweigert More articles by this author Marshall Baker More articles by this author Gopal Gupta More articles by this author Ahmer Farooq More articles by this author Thomas Turk More articles by this author Kristin G. Baldea More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ..." @default.
• W4248751261 created "2022-05-12" @default.
• W4248751261 creator A5009839520 @default.
• W4248751261 creator A5015431075 @default.
• W4248751261 creator A5026799522 @default.
• W4248751261 creator A5029101948 @default.
• W4248751261 creator A5052473737 @default.
• W4248751261 creator A5059578327 @default.
• W4248751261 creator A5067377863 @default.
• W4248751261 creator A5083363461 @default.
• W4248751261 creator A5083458653 @default.
• W4248751261 creator A5089560306 @default.
• W4248751261 date "2019-04-01" @default.
• W4248751261 modified "2023-09-29" @default.
• W4248751261 title "PD26-05 INITIAL EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCKWAVE LITHOTRIPSY VERSUS URETEROSCOPY: A RETREATMENT AND COST ANALYSIS USING A LONGITUDINAL, POPULATION-BASED DATABASE" @default.
• W4248751261 doi "https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000555926.82877.fd" @default.
• W4248751261 hasPublicationYear "2019" @default.
• W4248751261 type Work @default.
• W4248751261 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W4248751261 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4248751261 hasAuthorship W4248751261A5009839520 @default.
• W4248751261 hasAuthorship W4248751261A5015431075 @default.
• W4248751261 hasAuthorship W4248751261A5026799522 @default.
• W4248751261 hasAuthorship W4248751261A5029101948 @default.
• W4248751261 hasAuthorship W4248751261A5052473737 @default.
• W4248751261 hasAuthorship W4248751261A5059578327 @default.
• W4248751261 hasAuthorship W4248751261A5067377863 @default.
• W4248751261 hasAuthorship W4248751261A5083363461 @default.
• W4248751261 hasAuthorship W4248751261A5083458653 @default.
• W4248751261 hasAuthorship W4248751261A5089560306 @default.
• W4248751261 hasBestOaLocation W42487512611 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConcept C2776664737 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConcept C2777756408 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConcept C2777950166 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConcept C2779915274 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConcept C2780653459 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConcept C2908647359 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConcept C3020606620 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConcept C61434518 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConcept C99454951 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConceptScore W4248751261C141071460 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConceptScore W4248751261C2776664737 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConceptScore W4248751261C2777756408 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConceptScore W4248751261C2777950166 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConceptScore W4248751261C2779915274 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConceptScore W4248751261C2780653459 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConceptScore W4248751261C2908647359 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConceptScore W4248751261C3020606620 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConceptScore W4248751261C61434518 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConceptScore W4248751261C71924100 @default.
• W4248751261 hasConceptScore W4248751261C99454951 @default.
• W4248751261 hasIssue "Supplement 4" @default.
• W4248751261 hasLocation W42487512611 @default.
• W4248751261 hasOpenAccess W4248751261 @default.
• W4248751261 hasPrimaryLocation W42487512611 @default.
• W4248751261 hasRelatedWork W1603514336 @default.
• W4248751261 hasRelatedWork W2014376910 @default.
• W4248751261 hasRelatedWork W2409184741 @default.
• W4248751261 hasRelatedWork W2411509827 @default.
• W4248751261 hasRelatedWork W2413548482 @default.
• W4248751261 hasRelatedWork W2467616660 @default.
• W4248751261 hasRelatedWork W2468080861 @default.
• W4248751261 hasRelatedWork W2905470517 @default.
• W4248751261 hasRelatedWork W4231767157 @default.
• W4248751261 hasRelatedWork W74613082 @default.
• W4248751261 hasVolume "201" @default.
• W4248751261 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4248751261 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4248751261 workType "article" @default.