Contemporar management of ureteropelvic junction obstruction: Practice patterns in Minnesota

被引:7
作者
Fallon, E [1 ]
Ercole, B [1 ]
Lee, C [1 ]
Best, S [1 ]
Skenazy, J [1 ]
Monga, M [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Minnesota, Dept Urol Surg, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1089/end.2005.19.41
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background and Purpose: Ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction can be addressed surgically by an open, laparoscopic, endoscopic, or fluoroscopic procedure. Our objective was to establish what surgical alternatives are currently offered by urologists in Minnesota. Materials and Methods: A questionnaire was sent to 174 members of the Minnesota Urological Society. Practice settings were characterized as rural, urban, or metropolitan on the basis of the ZIP-code classifications of the Minnesota Ambulance Association and state geographic legislation. Respondents were asked to select initial treatment options for an adult patient with flank pain, decreased renal function, and hydronephrosis secondary to UPJ obstruction. Results: Whereas 60% of the respondents would offer open pyeloplasty, only 12% would offer it as the only treatment option. The two most common minimally invasive therapies offered were the Acucise balloon (48%) and percutaneous antegrade endopyelotomy (48%). Rural urologists were more likely to offer Acucise balloon incision (71%) than were urban (28%; P = 0.045) or metropolitan (55%; P = 0.412) urologists. Conclusions: The majority of urologists still offer open pyeloplasty as first-line therapy for UPJ obstruction. Further emphasis should be placed on increasing the availability of endoscopic and laparoscopic procedures.
引用
收藏
页码:41 / 44
页数:4
相关论文
共 14 条
[1]   Single-center comparison of laparoscopic pyeloplasty, Acucise endopyelotomy, and open pyeloplasty [J].
Baldwin, DD ;
Dunbar, JA ;
Wells, N ;
McDougall, EM .
JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2003, 17 (03) :155-160
[2]   Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty: Assessment of objective and subjective outcome [J].
Bauer, JJ ;
Bishoff, JT ;
Moore, RG ;
Chen, RN ;
Iverson, AJ ;
Kavoussi, LR .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1999, 162 (03) :692-695
[3]  
CARSON CC, 1998, GLENNS UROLOGIC SURG, P957
[4]  
CLAYMAN RV, 1995, ADULT PEDIAT UROLOGY, P786
[5]   Cost-effective treatment for ureteropelvic junction obstruction: A decision tree analysis [J].
Gettman, MT ;
Lotan, Y ;
Roerhborn, CG ;
Cadeddu, JA ;
Pearle, MS .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2003, 169 (01) :228-232
[6]   Practice trends in contemporary management of adult ureteropelvic junction obstruction [J].
Marcovich, R ;
Jacobson, AI ;
Aldana, JPA ;
Lee, DR ;
Smith, AD .
UROLOGY, 2003, 62 (01) :22-25
[7]   RESULTS OF 212 CONSECUTIVE ENDOPYELOTOMIES - AN 8-YEAR FOLLOW-UP [J].
MOTOLA, JA ;
BADLANI, GH ;
SMITH, AD .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1993, 149 (03) :453-456
[8]   Acucise endopyelotomy: Assessment of long-term durability - Reply [J].
Nadler, RB ;
Rao, GS ;
Pearle, MS ;
Nakada, SY ;
Clayman, RV .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1996, 156 (03) :1098-1098
[9]  
NOVICK AC, 1998, CAMPBELLS UROLOGY, P3032
[10]   A multicenter clinical trial investigating the use of a fluoroscopically controlled cutting balloon catheter for the management of ureteral and ureteropelvic junction obstruction [J].
Preminger, GM ;
Clayman, RV ;
Nakada, SY ;
Babayan, RK ;
Albala, DM ;
Fuchs, GJ ;
Smith, AD .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1997, 157 (05) :1625-1629