Effectiveness and safety of ureteroscopy in pregnant women: a comparative study

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorBozkurt, Yasar
dc.contributor.authorSoylemez, Haluk
dc.contributor.authorAtar, Murat
dc.contributor.authorSancaktutar, Ahmet Ali
dc.contributor.authorPenbegül, Necmettin
dc.contributor.authorHatipoglu, Namik Kemal
dc.contributor.authorBodakci, Mehmet Nuri
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-24T15:59:52Z
dc.date.available2024-04-24T15:59:52Z
dc.date.issued2013
dc.departmentDicle Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractThe aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of ureteroscopy (URS) in pregnant patients compared with non-pregnant patients. We reviewed the cases of 41 pregnant and 62 non-pregnant women who developed ureteral stones and were treated with URS in our center between April 2005 and September 2011. A semi-rigid 9.5 F ureteroscope was used. The calculi were fragmented with pneumatic lithotripsy or a holmium laser, and if necessary, a double-J (JJ) stent was inserted during the procedure. Among the pregnant women, the mean gestation period was 23.22 +/- 4.61 weeks (range 13-34), and the mean number of pregnancies per patient was 3 +/- 2.02 (range 1-10). The mean ages of the pregnant and non-pregnant patients were 27.41 +/- 5.79 and 28.54 +/- 7.94 years, respectively (p = 0.734). There were no statistically significant differences in stone localization, anesthesia type, stone diameter, methods of stone manipulation, JJ stent insertion rate, hospitalization length, or operative times between the two groups. For pregnant and non-pregnant patients, the stone-free rates achieved in a single session were 87.8 and 85.5 %, respectively (p = 0.737). There was no statistically significant difference in preoperative and postoperative complication rates between the two groups. The positive urine culture rate was statistically significantly higher for pregnant patients than non-pregnant patients (29.3 vs. 11.3 %; p = 0.021). We did not observe any serious obstetric complications. URS is a safe and reasonable treatment option for pregnant patients with ureteral stones refractory to medical treatment during pregnancy.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00240-012-0523-x
dc.identifier.endpage42en_US
dc.identifier.issn2194-7228
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.pmid23532421
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84880918723
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2
dc.identifier.startpage37en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-012-0523-x
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11468/14290
dc.identifier.volume41en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000318336000007
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherSpringeren_US
dc.relation.ispartofUrolithiasis
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectUreteroscopyen_US
dc.subjectPregnancyen_US
dc.subjectUreteral Stoneen_US
dc.titleEffectiveness and safety of ureteroscopy in pregnant women: a comparative studyen_US
dc.titleEffectiveness and safety of ureteroscopy in pregnant women: a comparative study
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu