Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorKarabulut, Ibrahim
dc.contributor.authorKeskin, Ercument
dc.contributor.authorBedir, Fevzi
dc.contributor.authorYilmazel, Fatih Kursat
dc.contributor.authorZiypak, Tevfik
dc.contributor.authorDoluoglu, Omer Gokhan
dc.contributor.authorGermiyanoglu, Cankon
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-21T13:33:25Z
dc.date.available2020-06-21T13:33:25Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.issn0090-4295
dc.identifier.issn1527-9995
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2016.02.028
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12712/13364
dc.descriptionWOS: 000375901500066en_US
dc.descriptionPubMed: 26921643en_US
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE To compare the outcomes of the ureteral access sheath (UAS) placement techniques in patients undergoing retrograde intrarenal surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS The patients were divided into two groups with respect to placement method of UAS. UAS was placed with the classical method, through the guidewire, in the first group of the patients (group I). The outer sheath of UAS was worn on the semirigid endoscope and placed into the ureter under direct vision in the second group (group II). The number of patients was the same in two groups (n = 42). RESULTS Overall, 70 of 84 (83.3%) patients were stone free after the initial treatment. The success rates were comparable between the two groups (80.9% vs 85.7%, P = .859) 1 month after surgery. Fluoroscopy screening time (11.7 +/- 5.7 seconds vs 0 second), UAS placement time (245 +/- 138.4 seconds vs 40 +/- 17.9 seconds; P < .001), and operation time (58.7 +/- 17.1 minutes vs 51.2 +/- 16.7 minutes; P = .046) were significantly longer in group I when compared to group II. The complication rate was higher in group I when compared to group II (23.8% vs 9.5%), but the difference was not statistically significant (P = .079). CONCLUSION Introducing UAS into ureter under direct vision while it was precisely worn on ureteroscope makes this step safer, and protects the surgeon and patient from radiation exposure by shortening fluoroscopy and operation times. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherElsevier Science Incen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1016/j.urology.2016.02.028en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.titleRigid Ureteroscope Aided Insertion of Ureteral Access Sheath in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgeryen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentOMÜen_US
dc.identifier.volume91en_US
dc.identifier.startpage222en_US
dc.identifier.endpage225en_US
dc.relation.journalUrologyen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

DosyalarBoyutBiçimGöster

Bu öğe ile ilişkili dosya yok.

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster