STORZ MEDICAL – Literature Databases
STORZ MEDICAL – Literature Databases
Literature Databases
Literature Databases

Liu Y. et al., 2021: Minimally-invasive stone removal in urinary calculi patients during pregnancy: clinical therapeutic effects and low complications.

Liu Y, Zhao C, Meng F, Xiong S, Yuan L, Lin F, Xu Y.
Department of Urology, Linyi Central Hospital Linyi, China.

Abstract

Purpose: To study the clinical effect of minimally-invasive surgery to treat urinary calculi and the prevention of surgery-associated complications during pregnancy.

Methods: A retrospective analysis of the clinical data of 96 pregnant urinary calculi patients admitted to our hospital from April 2017 to April 2018 was conducted. The patients were randomly divided into a study group and a control group, with 48 patients in each group. The control group was given extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESEL), and the study group underwent minimally-invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomies (MPCNL). The clinical efficacy and the complications associated with the two treatments were compared.

Results: The two groups' BUN and SCr levels were significantly decreased after the treatment (P < 0.05), with more significant reductions in the study group than in the control group (P < 0.001). There were marked reductions in the IL-6 and ET-1 levels in the two groups of patients post-treatment (P < 0.001), with greater decreases in the study group than in the control group (P < 0.001). The post-treatment CA and GLU levels were significantly lower than their pre-treatment values (P < 0.001), with greater decreases in the study group than in the control group (P < 0.001). Moreover, the patients' pain scores in the study group at post-surgery days 1, 3, and 5 were significantly lower than the post-surgery pain scores in the control group (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the stone removal rates between the two groups (P > 0.05). The Incidence of postoperative complications in the study group was significantly lower than the incidence in the control group (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: The use of MPCNL for patients with urinary calculi during pregnancy effectively improves renal function, decreases the inflammatory and stress responses, and lowers the postoperative pain. Therefore, this treatment merits clinical application.
Am J Transl Res. 2021 Aug 15;13(8):9614-9620. eCollection 2021. PMID: 34540086. FREE ARTICLE

0
 

Comments 1

Peter Alken on Wednesday, 16 March 2022 09:30

This is a weird publication. Why is it ESEL und not ESWL or SWL?
Pregnancy remains an absolute contraindication for SWL according to all available guidelines.
Stones had unusual positions. I do not remember to have seen pregnant women with urethral stones nor have I seen liver or small intestine perforations with either procedure.

https://www.storzmedical.com/images/blog/Liu.JPG

The women were in the 26th week of pregnancy and thus outside the major risk time of teratogenic damage prior to 8th week and after the 23rd week of gestation. However, was it really necessary to control the therapeutic effects radiologically by KUB 1 day, and by CT 2-3 weeks after the procedure in pregnant women?
Why was all that done?
The only significant question is why was it published?
The American Journal of Translational Research is an open-access medical journal published by e-Century Publishing Corporation located in the USA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Journal_of_Translational_Research)
“All manuscripts are subject to peer review and are expected to meet the rigorous standards of academic excellence. The authors should provide up to five potential peer reviewers with detailed contact information including e-mail address. These should be experts in their field of study, who will be able to provide an objective assessment of the manuscript. If not provided, potential reviewers will be identified by their publication record or recommended by the Editorial Board members.”
“The Open Access publication fee is $1880 per article.”
The 2021 impact factor is 4,06
The journal merits to be put on a black list

Peter Alken

This is a weird publication. Why is it ESEL und not ESWL or SWL? Pregnancy remains an absolute contraindication for SWL according to all available guidelines. Stones had unusual positions. I do not remember to have seen pregnant women with urethral stones nor have I seen liver or small intestine perforations with either procedure. [img]https://www.storzmedical.com/images/blog/Liu.JPG[/img] The women were in the 26th week of pregnancy and thus outside the major risk time of teratogenic damage prior to 8th week and after the 23rd week of gestation. However, was it really necessary to control the therapeutic effects radiologically by KUB 1 day, and by CT 2-3 weeks after the procedure in pregnant women? Why was all that done? The only significant question is why was it published? The American Journal of Translational Research is an open-access medical journal published by e-Century Publishing Corporation located in the USA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Journal_of_Translational_Research) “All manuscripts are subject to peer review and are expected to meet the rigorous standards of academic excellence. The authors should provide up to five potential peer reviewers with detailed contact information including e-mail address. These should be experts in their field of study, who will be able to provide an objective assessment of the manuscript. If not provided, potential reviewers will be identified by their publication record or recommended by the Editorial Board members.” “The Open Access publication fee is $1880 per article.” The 2021 impact factor is 4,06 The journal merits to be put on a black list Peter Alken
Saturday, 18 May 2024