Ureterolithiasis: Management in an environment with limited facilities

Odoemene, C; Okere, Pcn; Ugonabo, Martin C

doi:10.4103/njcp.njcp_14_16

Cited by 10 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The sizes of stones managed in the series ranged from 5–95 mm. 16 , 23 , 47 , 49 The rate of open surgery for upper tract urolithiasis was about 69.5% in the review with nephrolithotomy 20.8%, pyelolithotomy 37.9%, ureterolithotomy 29.9% and nephrectomy 7.9%. Authors from Senegal (Diallo et al; /Kane et al) 11 , 12 and Kenya (Ngugi et al; Wathigo et al) 19 , 20 reported a considerable use of endoscopic surgery for upper tract urolithiasis.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…of Patients Mean Age (years) Age Range (years) Percent of Male to Female Type of Stone Stone Location Diallo et al Senegal 11 2008–2012 52 42.7±5.2 13–70 M: 66.7% F: 33.3% N/A Renal: 38.2% Ureteral: 61.8% Kane et al Senegal 12 2009–2013 89 44.0 4–75 N/A N/A Renal: 50.9% Ureters: 49.4% Odzebe et al Congo Brazzaville 13 2000−2004 68 52.1 14–82 M: 76.5% F: 23.5% N/A Renal: 29.4% Ureters: 1.5% Bladder: 69.1% Odzebe et al Congo Brazzaville 14 2002–2013 71 9.1 0.2–15 M: 67.6% F: 32.4% Calcium oxalate 26.4%, struvite 13.2%, calcium phosphate 9.4% Renal: 36.8% Ureters: 7.9% Bladder: 46.1% Omisanjo et al Nigeria 15 2012–2016 76 49.1±16.3 2–84 M: 64.5% F: 35.5% N/A Renal: 36.8% Ureters: 7.9% Bladder: 48.7% Odoemene et al Nigeria 16 2007–2014 69 40.4 8–72 M: 76.8% F: 23.2% …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

<p>Surgical Management of Urolithiasis of the Upper Tract – Current Trend of Endourology in Africa</p>

Cassell

Jalloh

Mbodji

et al. 2020

RRU

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urolithiasis is a global pathology with increasing prevalence rate. The lifetime recurrence of urolithiasis ranges from 10–75% creating a public health crisis in affected regions. The epidemiology of urolithiasis in most parts of Africa and Asia remains poorly documented as incidence and prevalence rates in these settings are extrapolated from hospital admissions. The surgical management of kidney and ureteral stones is based on the stone location, size, the patient’s preference and the institutional capacity. To date, the available modalities in the management of urolithiasis includes external shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), ureterorenoscopy (URS) including flexible and semirigid ureteroscopy. However, regarding the lack of endourological equipment and expertise in most parts of Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), most urological centers in these regions still consider open surgery for kidney and ureteral stones. This review explores the current trend and surgical management of upper tract urolithiasis in SSA with insight on the available clinical guidelines.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

<p>Surgical Management of Urolithiasis of the Upper Tract – Current Trend of Endourology in Africa</p>

Cassell

Jalloh

Mbodji

et al. 2020

RRU

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Patients presenting with acute renal colic at the emergency department Authors Year Country Study design No. of patients % Male Mean age ± SD (years) Kim et al [ 13 ] 2018 South Korea Retrospective, observational 798 68.6 48.2 ± 13.3 Desai et al [ 14 ] 2018 USA Retrospective, observational 350 NR NR Türk and Ün [ 15 ] a 2017 Turkey Prospective, observational 516 60.5 37 ± 20.3 Shrestha et al [ 16 ] a 2017 Nepal Retrospective, observational 201 55.2 29 ± 13.5 Odoemene et al [ 17 ] a 2017 Nigeria Prospective, observational 69 76.8 40.4 ± 2.9 Mefford et al [ 18 ] 2017 USA Retrospective, observational 393 69 Median 43 (IQR 32–54) Rapp et al [ 19 ] 2016 USA Retrospective, observational 613 47 49 ± 0.6 Park et al [ 20 ] 2016 South Korea Prospective, RCT 103 66 45.6 ± 12.55 Hernandez et al [ 21 ] 2016 USA Retrospective, observational 536 56 45.9 ± 16.3 <...>…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Definition of microhematuria was different among the included studies. Six studies included also patients presenting with macroscopic hematuria [14,17,19,22,26,50]. Details on the microhematuria test are reported in Table 2.…”

Section: Selected Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence of microhematuria in renal colic and urolithiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to investigate the prevalence of microhematuria in patients presenting with suspected acute renal colic and/or confirmed urolithiasis at the emergency department. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to find relevant data on prevalence of microhematuria in patients with suspected acute renal colic and/or confirmed urolithiasis. Data from each study regarding study design, patient characteristics and prevalence of microhematuria were retrieved. A random effect-model was used for the pooled analyses. Results: Forty-nine articles including 15′860 patients were selected through the literature search. The pooled microhematuria prevalence was 77% (95%CI: 73-80%) and 84% (95%CI: 80-87%) for suspected acute renal colic and confirmed urolithiasis, respectively. This proportion was much higher when the dipstick was used as diagnostic test (80 and 90% for acute renal colic and urolithiasis, respectively) compared to the microscopic urinalysis (74 and 78% for acute renal colic and urolithiasis, respectively). Conclusions: This meta-analysis revealed a high prevalence of microhematuria in patients with acute renal colic (77%), including those with confirmed urolithiasis (84%). Intending this prevalence as sensitivity, we reached moderate values, which make microhematuria alone a poor diagnostic test for acute renal colic or urolithiasis. Microhematuria could possibly still important to assess the risk in patients with renal colic.

show abstract

“…De nition of microhematuria was different among the included studies. Six studies included also patients presenting with macroscopic hematuria [14,17,19,22,26,50]. Details on the microhematuria test are reported in Table 2.…”

Section: Selected Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence of microhematuria in renal colic and urolithiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Minotti

Treglia

Pascale

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract Background This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to investigate the prevalence of microhematuria in patients presenting with suspected acute renal colic and/or confirmed urolithiasis at the emergency department. Methods A comprehensive literature search was conducted to find relevant data on prevalence of microhematuria in patients with suspected acute renal colic and/or confirmed urolithiasis. Data from each study regarding study design, patient characteristics and prevalence of microhematuria were retrieved. A random effect-model was used for the pooled analyses. Results Forty-nine articles including 15’860 patients were selected through the literature search. The pooled microhematuria prevalence was 77% (95%CI: 73-80%) and 84% (95%CI: 80-87%) for suspected acute renal colic and confirmed urolithiasis, respectively. This proportion was much higher when the dipstick was used as diagnostic test (80% and 90% for acute renal colic and urolithiasis, respectively) compared to the microscopic urinalysis (74% and 78% for acute renal colic and urolithiasis, respectively). Conclusions This meta-analysis revealed a high prevalence of microhematuria in patients with acute renal colic (77%), including those with confirmed urolithiasis (84%). Intending this prevalence as sensitivity, we reached moderate values, which make microhematuria alone a poor diagnostic test for acute renal colic or urolithiasis. Microhematuria could possibly still important to assess the risk in patients with renal colic.

show abstract

Ureterolithiasis: Management in an environment with limited facilities

Abstract: Management of ureteric stones in our environment is affected by delay in presentation, low level of awareness of urinary stone disease, lack of modern endourological equipment, and paucity of urological surgeons. Finally, medical treatment should be explored for stones below 10 mm in size.

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

<p>Surgical Management of Urolithiasis of the Upper Tract – Current Trend of Endourology in Africa</p>

<p>Surgical Management of Urolithiasis of the Upper Tract – Current Trend of Endourology in Africa</p>

Prevalence of microhematuria in renal colic and urolithiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Prevalence of microhematuria in renal colic and urolithiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About