ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Urinary lithiasis is a common disease. The aim of the present study is to assess the knowledge regarding the diagnosis, treatment and recommendations given to patients with ureteral colic by professionals of an academic hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-five physicians were interviewed about previous experience with guidelines regarding ureteral colic and how they manage patients with ureteral colic in regards to diagnosis, treatment and the information provided to the patients. RESULTS: Thirty-six percent of the interviewed physicians were surgeons, and 64% were clinicians. Forty-one percent of the physicians reported experience with ureterolithiasis guidelines. Seventy-two percent indicated that they use noncontrast CT scans for the diagnosis of lithiasis. All of the respondents prescribe hydration, primarily for the improvement of stone elimination (39.3%). The average number of drugs used was 3.5. The combination of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids was reported by 54% of the physicians (i.e., 59% of surgeons and 25.6% of clinicians used this combination of drugs) (p = 0.014). Only 21.3% prescribe alpha blockers. CONCLUSION: Reported experience with guidelines had little impact on several habitual practices. For example, only 21.3% of the respondents indicated that they prescribed alpha blockers; however, alpha blockers may increase stone elimination by up to 54%. Furthermore, although a meta-analysis demonstrated that hydration had no effect on the transit time of the stone or on the pain, the majority of the physicians reported that they prescribed more than 500 ml of fluid. Dipyrone, hyoscine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and opioids were identified as the most frequently prescribed drug combination. The information regarding the time for the passage of urinary stones was inconsistent. The development of continuing education programs regarding ureteral colic in the emergency room is necessary.
Subject(s)
Female , Humans , Fluid Therapy/statistics & numerical data , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Renal Colic/therapy , Ureteral Calculi/therapy , Adrenergic alpha-Antagonists/therapeutic use , Analgesics/therapeutic use , Brazil/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital , Guideline Adherence , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Hospitals, University , Renal Colic , Ureteral CalculiABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to compare the effects of renal ice slush hypothermia and the use of trimetazidine in the protection against ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) injury. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen farm pigs were submitted to left kidney ischemia and right nephrectomy during the same procedure. Animals were divided into three groups. Group 1 was submitted to warm ischemia; Group 2 was submitted to cold ischemia with ice slush; and Group 3 received trimetazidine 20 mg one day and 4 hours before surgery. Ischemia time was 120 minutes in all three groups. Serum creatinine (SCr) and plasma iohexol clearance (CLioh) were measured before surgery and on postoperative days (PODs) 1,3,7, and 14. Semi-quantitative analyses of histological alterations were performed by a pathologist. A p value of < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: All groups showed elevation of serum creatinine in the first week. Serum creatinine was higher in Group 3 in the first and third postoperative days (Mean Cr: 5.5 and 8.1 respectively). Group 2 showed a lower increase in creatinine and a lower decrease in iohexol clearance than the others. Renal function stabilized in the fourteenth POD in all three groups. Analyses of histological alterations did not reach statistical significance between groups. CONCLUSION: Trimetazidine did not show protection against renal I/R injury in comparison to warm ischemia or hypothermia in a porcine model submitted to 120 minutes of renal ischemia.
Subject(s)
Animals , Hypothermia, Induced/methods , Ice , Ischemic Preconditioning/methods , Kidney/blood supply , Reperfusion Injury/prevention & control , Trimetazidine/pharmacology , Vasodilator Agents/pharmacology , Cold Ischemia/methods , Disease Models, Animal , Kidney/drug effects , Reperfusion Injury/pathology , Sus scrofaSubject(s)
Humans , Male , Adolescent , Female , Congenital Abnormalities , Cryptorchidism , Phimosis , Sexually Transmitted Diseases , Urinary Tract , Varicocele , Sexuality , VaricoceleABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: We present the results of treatment by laparoscopy of two patients with retroperitoneal fibrosis and review the literature since 1992, when the first case of this disease that was treated using laparoscopy was published. We also discuss the contemporary alternatives of clinical treatment with corticosteroids and tamoxifen. CASE REPORT: Two female patients, one with idiopathic retroperitoneal fibrosis, and other with retroperitoneal fibrosis associated with Riedel's thyroiditis, were treated using laparoscopic surgery. Both cases had bilateral pelvic ureteral obstruction and were treated using the same technique: transperitoneal laparoscopy, medial mobilization of both colons, liberation of both ureters from the fibrosis, and intraperitonealisation of the ureters. Double-J catheters were inserted before the operations and removed 3 weeks after the procedures. The first patient underwent intraperitonealisation of both ureters in a single procedure. The other had 2 different surgical procedures because of technical difficulties during the first operation. Both patients were followed for more than 1 year and recovered completely from the renal insufficiency. One of them still has occasional vague lumbar pain. There were no abnormalities in the intravenous pyelography in either case. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical correction of retroperitoneal fibrosis, when indicated, should be attempted using laparoscopy. If possible, bilateral ureterolysis and intraperitonealisation of both ureters should be performed in the same operation