Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Office Based Pediatric Urologic Procedures: A Safe and Effective Alternative to Interventions Under Anesthesia.
Aghababian, Aznive; Mittal, Sameer; Eftekharzadeh, Sahar; Hamdan, Dawud; Weaver, John; Godlewski, Karl; Fischer, Katherine; Long, Christopher; Weiss, Dana; Van Batavia, Jason; Zaontz, Mark; Zderic, Stephen; Kolon, Thomas; Canning, Douglas; Shukla, Aseem; Srinivasan, Arun.
Afiliação
  • Aghababian A; Division of Urology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Mittal S; Division of Urology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA; Division of Urology, Perelman Center for Advanced Care, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Eftekharzadeh S; Division of Urology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Hamdan D; Division of Urology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Weaver J; Division of Urology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Godlewski K; Division of Urology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Fischer K; Division of Urology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Long C; Division of Urology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA; Division of Urology, Perelman Center for Advanced Care, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Weiss D; Division of Urology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA; Division of Urology, Perelman Center for Advanced Care, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Van Batavia J; Division of Urology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA; Division of Urology, Perelman Center for Advanced Care, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Zaontz M; Division of Urology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA; Division of Urology, Perelman Center for Advanced Care, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Zderic S; Division of Urology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA; Division of Urology, Perelman Center for Advanced Care, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Kolon T; Division of Urology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA; Division of Urology, Perelman Center for Advanced Care, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Canning D; Division of Urology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA; Division of Urology, Perelman Center for Advanced Care, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Shukla A; Division of Urology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA; Division of Urology, Perelman Center for Advanced Care, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Srinivasan A; Division of Urology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA; Division of Urology, Perelman Center for Advanced Care, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Electronic address: srinivasana3@email.chop.edu.
Urology ; 166: 223-226, 2022 08.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35461916
OBJECTIVE: To report on our experience performing office-based pediatric urologic procedures. We hypothesize that office-based interventions are safe and effective for children, avoiding unnecessary risk and cost associated with general anesthesia. METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients undergoing office-based interventions from 2014 to 2019, including lysis of penile or labial adhesions, division of skin bridges, meatotomy and excision of benign lesion. Success was defined as a completed attempt in the office. Failure includes any unsuccessful office attempts. Complications include 30-day ED visits/readmissions and recurrent skin bridge post division of skin bridge. RESULTS: We identified 1326 interventions: 491 lyses of penile adhesions (37%), 320 division of skin bridges (24%), 128 lyses of labial adhesions (10%), 348 meatotomies (26%), and 39 excisions of benign lesions (3%) [Table 1]. There was a >95% success rate reported in every procedure with an overall complication rate of 0.6%. Excision of benign lesion had 100% success rate. ED visits within 30 days are rare (0.2%), and no patients required admission after their procedure [Table 2]. The rate of recurrence was highest following lysis of labial adhesions (13.3%). Of the 54 patients who underwent retreatment, very few required general anesthesia (n = 6). CONCLUSION: Office-based urologic interventions in children are well tolerated with excellent safety and efficacy. Complications and recurrence are universally low. Ultimately, 99.5% of this cohort was managed under local anesthetics, thereby avoiding the risks of anesthesia use in the pediatric population.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Ambulatórios / Anestésicos Locais Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Child / Humans Idioma: En Revista: Urology Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article País de publicação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Ambulatórios / Anestésicos Locais Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Child / Humans Idioma: En Revista: Urology Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article País de publicação: Estados Unidos