scholarly journals Comparative analysis of retrograde intrarenal surgery and modified Ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of lower pole renal stones (1.5-3.5 cm)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhuohang Li ◽  
Cong Lai ◽  
Arvind K. Shah ◽  
Weibin Xie ◽  
Cheng Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Renal Stones ◽  
Postoperative Hospital Stay ◽  
Lithotomy Position ◽  
Base Line ◽  
Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Stone Characteristics ◽  
Illness Condition

Abstract Purpose To compare the safety and efficacy of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and modified Ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMP) in semi-supine combined lithotomy position for the management of 1.5-3.5 cm lower pole renal stones (LPSs). Methods A total of 63 patients with 1.5-3.5 cm LPSs who underwent RIRS (n= 33) or modified UMP (n= 30) in diameter between January 2017 and January 2019 were analyzed retrospectively. Modified UMP was performed in semi-supine combined lithotomy position and a 9.5/11.5 F ureteral access sheath (UAS) was inserted during the procedure in order to maintain low pelvic pressure and to facilitate the removal of stone fragments. Base-line parameters, stone characteristics, illness condition, operation time, postoperative hemoglobin (Hb) drop, postoperative creatinine (Cr) elevation, length of hospital stay, length of postoperative hospital stay, stone-free rate (SFR) and complications were compared between the two groups. Results There were no significant differences between the two groups in base-line parameters, stone characteristics and illness condition. The mean operating time of RIRS group was longer than UMP group (95.61 ± 21.9 vs. 55.0 ± 16.1 min, p< 0.001). The mean postoperative Hb drop was less in RIRS group (7.42 ± 4.7 vs. 15.70 ± 9.8 g/L, p< 0.001). The length of hospital stay and postoperative hospital stay for RIRS were shorter than UMP (4.76 ± 1.1 vs. 5.83 ± 0.8 d, p< 0.001, 2.97 ± 0.9 vs. 4.07 ± 0.9 d, p< 0.001). The Early SFR was higher in UMP group (54.5 vs. 80.0%, p< 0.050) while SFR at 1-month and 3-months postoperatively was similar in both groups (p= 0.504, p= 0.675). There were no significant differences between the two groups in complications (p= 0.228). Conclusion For patients with 1.5-3.5 cm LPSs, both modified UMP and RIRS are safe and viable. The modified UMP technique was used in this study, application semi-supine combined lithotomy position and the retention of UAS can improve the surgical efficiency and maintain low pressure perfusion in the kidney, which resulted in superior treatment efficacy. Therefore, we highly recommend this technique for LPSs with heavy stone burdens.

scholarly journals Comparative analysis of retrograde intrarenal surgery and modified Ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of lower pole renal stones (1.5-3.5 cm)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhuohang Li ◽  
Cong Lai ◽  
Arvind K. Shah ◽  
Weibin Xie ◽  
Cheng Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Renal Stones ◽  
Postoperative Hospital Stay ◽  
Lithotomy Position ◽  
Base Line ◽  
Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Stone Characteristics ◽  
Illness Condition

Abstract Background：To compare the safety and efficacy of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and modified Ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMP) in semi-supine combined lithotomy position for the management of 1.5-3.5 cm lower pole renal stones (LPSs). Methods: A total of 63 patients with 1.5-3.5 cm LPSs who underwent RIRS (n= 33) or modified UMP (n= 30) in diameter between January 2017 and January 2019 were analyzed retrospectively. Modified UMP was performed in semi-supine combined lithotomy position and a 9.5/11.5 F ureteral access sheath (UAS) was inserted during the procedure in order to maintain low pelvic pressure and to facilitate the removal of stone fragments. Base-line parameters, stone characteristics, illness condition, operation time, postoperative hemoglobin (Hb) drop, postoperative creatinine (Cr) elevation, length of hospital stay, length of postoperative hospital stay, stone-free rate (SFR) and complications were compared between the two groups. Results: There were no significant differences between the two groups in base-line parameters, stone characteristics and illness condition. The mean operating time of RIRS group was longer than UMP group (95.61 ± 21.9 vs. 55.0 ± 16.1 min, p< 0.001). The mean postoperative Hb drop was less in RIRS group (7.42 ± 4.7 vs. 15.70 ± 9.8 g/L, p< 0.001). The length of hospital stay and postoperative hospital stay for RIRS were shorter than UMP (4.76 ± 1.1 vs. 5.83 ± 0.8 d, p< 0.001, 2.97 ± 0.9 vs. 4.07 ± 0.9 d, p< 0.001). The Early SFR was higher in UMP group (54.5 vs. 80.0%, p< 0.050) while SFR at 1-month and 3-months postoperatively was similar in both groups (p= 0.504, p= 0.675). There were no significant differences between the two groups in complications (p= 0.228). Conclusion：For patients with 1.5-3.5 cm LPSs, both modified UMP and RIRS are safe and viable. The modified UMP technique was used in this study, application semi-supine combined lithotomy position and the retention of UAS can improve the surgical efficiency and maintain low pressure perfusion in the kidney, which resulted in superior treatment efficacy. Therefore, we highly recommend this technique for LPSs with heavy stone burdens.

scholarly journals Comparative analysis of retrograde intrarenal surgery and modified Ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of lower pole renal stones (1.5-3.5 cm)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhuohang Li ◽  
Cong Lai ◽  
Arvind K. Shah ◽  
Weibin Xie ◽  
Cheng Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Renal Stones ◽  
Postoperative Hospital Stay ◽  
Lithotomy Position ◽  
Base Line ◽  
Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Stone Characteristics ◽  
Illness Condition

Abstract Abstract Background：To compare the safety and efficacy of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and modified Ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMP) in semi-supine combined lithotomy position for the management of 1.5-3.5 cm lower pole renal stones (LPSs). Methods: A total of 63 patients with 1.5-3.5 cm LPSs who underwent RIRS (n= 33) or modified UMP (n= 30) in diameter between January 2017 and January 2019 were analyzed retrospectively. Modified UMP was performed in semi-supine combined lithotomy position and a 9.5/11.5 F ureteral access sheath (UAS) was inserted during the procedure in order to maintain low pelvic pressure and to facilitate the removal of stone fragments. Base-line parameters, stone characteristics, illness condition, operation time, postoperative hemoglobin (Hb) drop, postoperative creatinine (Cr) elevation, length of hospital stay, length of postoperative hospital stay, stone-free rate (SFR) and complications were compared between the two groups. Results: There were no significant differences between the two groups in base-line parameters, stone characteristics and illness condition. The mean operating time of RIRS group was longer than UMP group (95.61 ± 21.9 vs. 55.0 ± 16.1 min, p< 0.001). The mean postoperative Hb drop was less in RIRS group (7.42 ± 4.7 vs. 15.70 ± 9.8 g/L, p< 0.001). The length of hospital stay and postoperative hospital stay for RIRS were shorter than UMP (4.76 ± 1.1 vs. 5.83 ± 0.8 d, p< 0.001, 2.97 ± 0.9 vs. 4.07 ± 0.9 d, p< 0.001). The Early SFR was higher in UMP group (54.5 vs. 80.0%, p< 0.050) while SFR at 1-month and 3-months postoperatively was similar in both groups (p= 0.504, p= 0.675). There were no significant differences between the two groups in complications (p= 0.228). Conclusion：For patients with 1.5-3.5 cm LPSs, both modified UMP and RIRS are safe and viable. The modified UMP technique was used in this study, application semi-supine combined lithotomy position and the retention of UAS can improve the surgical efficiency and maintain low pressure perfusion in the kidney, which resulted in superior treatment efficacy. Therefore, we highly recommend this technique for LPSs with heavy stone burdens.

scholarly journals Comparative analysis of retrograde intrarenal surgery and modified Ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of lower pole renal stones (1.5-3.5 cm)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhuohang Li ◽  
Cong Lai ◽  
Arvind K. Shah ◽  
Weibin Xie ◽  
Cheng Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Renal Stones ◽  
Postoperative Hospital Stay ◽  
Lithotomy Position ◽  
Base Line ◽  
Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Stone Characteristics ◽  
Illness Condition

Abstract Background：To compare the safety and efficacy of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and modified Ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMP) in semi-supine combined lithotomy position for the management of 1.5-3.5 cm lower pole renal stones (LPSs). Methods: A total of 63 patients with 1.5-3.5 cm LPSs who underwent RIRS (n= 33) or modified UMP (n= 30) in diameter between January 2017 and January 2019 were analyzed retrospectively. Modified UMP was performed in semi-supine combined lithotomy position and a 9.5/11.5 F ureteral access sheath (UAS) was inserted during the procedure in order to maintain low pelvic pressure and to facilitate the removal of stone fragments. Base-line parameters, stone characteristics, illness condition, operation time, postoperative hemoglobin (Hb) drop, postoperative creatinine (Cr) elevation, length of hospital stay, length of postoperative hospital stay, stone-free rate (SFR) and complications were compared between the two groups. Results: There were no significant differences between the two groups in base-line parameters, stone characteristics and illness condition. The mean operating time of RIRS group was longer than UMP group (95.61 ± 21.9 vs. 55.0 ± 16.1 min, p< 0.001). The mean postoperative Hb drop was less in RIRS group (7.42 ± 4.7 vs. 15.70 ± 9.8 g/L, p< 0.001). The length of hospital stay and postoperative hospital stay for RIRS were shorter than UMP (4.76 ± 1.1 vs. 5.83 ± 0.8 d, p< 0.001, 2.97 ± 0.9 vs. 4.07 ± 0.9 d, p< 0.001). The Early SFR was higher in UMP group (54.5 vs. 80.0%, p< 0.050) while SFR at 1-month and 3-months postoperatively was similar in both groups (p= 0.504, p= 0.675). There were no significant differences between the two groups in complications (p= 0.228). Conclusion：For patients with 1.5-3.5 cm LPSs, both modified UMP and RIRS are safe and viable. The modified UMP technique was used in this study, application semi-supine combined lithotomy position and the retention of UAS can improve the surgical efficiency and maintain low pressure perfusion in the kidney, which resulted in superior treatment efficacy. Therefore, we highly recommend this technique for LPSs with heavy stone burdens.

scholarly journals Comparative analysis of retrograde intrarenal surgery and modified Ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of lower pole renal stones (1.5-3.5 cm)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhuohang Li ◽  
Cong Lai ◽  
Arvind K. Shah ◽  
Weibin Xie ◽  
Cheng Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Renal Stones ◽  
Postoperative Hospital Stay ◽  
Lithotomy Position ◽  
Base Line ◽  
Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Stone Characteristics ◽  
Illness Condition

Abstract Background：To compare the safety and efficacy of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and modified Ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMP) in semi-supine combined lithotomy position for the management of 1.5-3.5 cm lower pole renal stones (LPSs). Methods: A total of 63 patients with 1.5-3.5 cm LPSs who underwent RIRS (n= 33) or modified UMP (n= 30) in diameter between January 2017 and January 2019 were analyzed retrospectively. Modified UMP was performed in semi-supine combined lithotomy position and a 9.5/11.5 F ureteral access sheath (UAS) was inserted during the procedure in order to maintain low pelvic pressure and to facilitate the removal of stone fragments. Base-line parameters, stone characteristics, illness condition, operation time, postoperative hemoglobin (Hb) drop, postoperative creatinine (Cr) elevation, length of hospital stay, length of postoperative hospital stay, stone-free rate (SFR) and complications were compared between the two groups. Results: There were no significant differences between the two groups in base-line parameters, stone characteristics and illness condition. The mean operating time of RIRS group was longer than UMP group (95.61 ± 21.9 vs. 55.0 ± 16.1 min, p< 0.001). The mean postoperative Hb drop was less in RIRS group (7.42 ± 4.7 vs. 15.70 ± 9.8 g/L, p< 0.001). The length of hospital stay and postoperative hospital stay for RIRS were shorter than UMP (4.76 ± 1.1 vs. 5.83 ± 0.8 d, p< 0.001, 2.97 ± 0.9 vs. 4.07 ± 0.9 d, p< 0.001). The Early SFR was higher in UMP group (54.5 vs. 80.0%, p< 0.050) while SFR at 1-month and 3-months postoperatively was similar in both groups (p= 0.504, p= 0.675). There were no significant differences between the two groups in complications (p= 0.228). Conclusion：For patients with 1.5-3.5 cm LPSs, both modified UMP and RIRS are safe and viable. The modified UMP technique was used in this study, application semi-supine combined lithotomy position and the retention of UAS can improve the surgical efficiency and maintain low pressure perfusion in the kidney, which resulted in superior treatment efficacy. Therefore, we highly recommend this technique for LPSs with heavy stone burdens.

scholarly journals An Early Experience of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery (RIRS) in National Institute of Kidney Diseases and Urology

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-10
Author(s):  
Md Nasir Uddin ◽  
Imtiaz Enayetullah ◽  
Kazi Zikrur Razzaque ◽  
Sharif Md Shahadat Ali Khan ◽  
Kazi Rafiqul Abedin
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Analysis ◽  
Blood Transfusion ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Kidney Diseases ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Renal Stones ◽  
Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery ◽  
Ureteral Access Sheath ◽  
Access Sheath ◽  
The Mean

Background: Advancements in the endoscopic armamentarium, retrograde intrarenal surgery has become a viable and attractive option for the treatment of renal stones because of its high stone-free rates (SFRs) and low morbidity. Objective: To describe our experience and outcome of RIRS for the treatment of renal stones and to assess its effectiveness and safety. Design, setting, and participants: A retrospective analysis of 60 patients who underwent RIRS for renal stones at our institute between January 2018 to December 2018 was performed. Surgical procedure: Flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy using a standardized technique with last-generation flexible ureteroscopes (Flex-Xc) using Holmium-YAG laser. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Clinical data were collected and intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were assessed (Ureteral access sheath placement, operation time, hospital stay, stone free rate, post-operative blood transfusion & fever, need for second session of RIRS. A descriptive statistical analysis was performed. Results and limitations: The mean overall stone size was 13±3 mm. Pre stenting done in all cases. Ureteral access sheath placement was possible in 54(90%) patients. At 1 month follow-up, the overall primary SFR was 86.67%(52 cases), the secondary SFR was 96.67%(58 cases).The mean operative time was 91.96±18.7 min. Mean hospital stay was 1.86±1.02 days. Complications were reported in 8 (13.33%) patients overall, with fever in 6 patients (10%), steinstrasse in 2(3.33%) patients need for second session RIRS in 6 patients (10%).No patient needed blood transfusion. The main limitation of the study is the retrospective nature. Conclusions: RIRS performed using a flexible ureterorenoscope marked the beginning of a new era in urology. It is safe and effective procedure and an alternative to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in the treatment of selected renal stones. Bangladesh Journal of Urology, Vol. 23, No. 1, January 2020 p.3-10

scholarly journals Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery vs. Miniaturised Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy to Treat Lower Pole Renal Stone < 2 cms Diameter in Western Part of Odisha

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (19) ◽  
pp. 1347-1351
Author(s):  
Ashok Kumar Nayak ◽  
Sanjay Kumar Mahapatra ◽  
Braja Mohan Mishra ◽  
Dipti Ranjan Dhar ◽  
Biswajit Sahu
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy ◽  
Operating Time ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Renal Stones ◽  
Analysis Data ◽  
Lower Pole ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery ◽  
The Mean

BACKGROUND We wanted to compare the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) in treating lower pole (LP) renal stones with a diameter of < 2 cm in terms of safety, efficacy, and stonefree rate (SFR). METHODS In a retrospective analysis data of 39 patients who underwent mini-PCNL (N = 19) or RIRS (N = 20) for LP stones with a diameter of < 2 cm were reviewed between November 2018 and November 2020 at the Department of Urology in Veer Surendra Sai Institute of Medical Sciences and Research (VSSIMSAR), Odisha. The mean age, sex, stone size, operating time, complications, hospital stay, and SFR were compared between the groups. The success of the procedure was defined as the absence of residual stones or small residuals of size 3mm or less on computed tomography at 12 weeks postoperatively. RESULTS Significant differences were found in the hospital stay duration in hours (103.3 ± 11.7 vs. 145.2 ± 16.4, P < 0.028) between the RIRS and mini - PCNL groups. The mean operation time (in minutes) was also significantly different between the RIRS group (82.5 ± 3.44) and mini PCNL group (86.21 ± 5.90, P = 0.021). The stonefree rates in the postoperative period at three months (RIRS vs. mini - PCNL: 95 % vs. 94 %, P = 0.47) were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS RIRS and mini-PCNL are both safe and effective methods for treating LP stones with a diameter of < 2 cm. RIRS can be considered as a less invasive alternative to PCNL for the treatment of LP stones of < 2 cm with reasonable SFR with shorter hospital stay. KEYWORDS Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery, Percutaneous Nephrolithotripsy, Lower Pole Kidney Stones, Miniaturized Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy

scholarly journals Association of body mass index with the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery

2021 ◽  
pp. 124-130
Author(s):  
Volkan Selmi ◽  
Sercan Sarı ◽  
Mehmet Çağlar Çakıcı ◽  
Harun Özdemir ◽  
İbrahim Güven Kartal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Renal Stones ◽  
Overweight And Obesity ◽  
World Health ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Obese Patients ◽  
Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery ◽  
Stone Free Rate ◽  
Free Rate

Objective: Overweight and obesity increased worldwide over four decades. In 2016, nearly 11% of men and 15% of women over 18 years old were obese. Obesity is accepted as a risk factor for renal stones. The relationship between obesity and urolithiasis is complicated. Various complications can occur during perioperative or postoperative follow-up in obese patients. Minimal invasive nature and high efficacy of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery (RIRS) present itself as a safe and less morbid treatment option. In this study, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of RIRS in the treatment of kidney stones in different BMI levels. Material and Methods: Files of 552 patients who underwent RIRS for renal stones between January 2012 and December 2017 were reviewed. We classified patients according to the World Health Organisation classification. These three groups were compared for stone-free rate, complication rate, operative and fluoroscopy times and length of hospital stay. Results: The stone-free rate (SFR) of the study population was 80.8%. It was 81% for Group 1, 83.7% for Group 2 and 77.7% for Group 3. There was no statistically significant difference between the three groups among SFR (p=0.346). Clinical insignificant residual fragments (CIRF) status was also similar among the three groups (p=0.254). Complication rates between the three groups were statistically similar (p=0.416). Conclusion: In this study, we have shown that RIRS is a suitable option for all urolithiasis patients, even for obese individuals. Stone-free rates, length of hospital stay, operation time and complication rates in obese patients are similar with non-obese patients. Keywords: urolithiasis; obesity; laser lithotripsy

scholarly journals Plantago ovata (Laxomucil) after hemorrhoidectomy

2004 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 121-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dragutin Kecmanovic ◽  
Maja Pavlov ◽  
Miljan Ceranic ◽  
Aleksandar Sepetkovski ◽  
Predrag Kovacevic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Postoperative Hospital Stay ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Plantago Ovata ◽  
Open Hemorrhoidectomy ◽  
Function Recovery ◽  
Postoperative Length ◽  
The Mean

The aim of this prospective randomized study is to describe the effects of laxative plantago ovata after open hemorrhoidectomy (Milligan-Morgan). Sixty patients divided into 2 equal groups were included in this study. The first group was treated postoperatively with 2 sachets of bulk agent Laxomucil (3,26 g plantago ovata), twice daily, for a period of twenty days, while the control group was treated with glycerin oil. The p.ovata group patients had a statistically significant shorter postoperative length of hospital stay (2,9 v.s. 4,1 days). Pain after stool was statistically significant more tolerable in the p.ovata group. In conclusion, the application of bulk agent plantago ovata after hemorrhoidectomy shortens the mean postoperative hospital stay, expedites digestive function recovery and lessens the pain after stool.

Pilonidal Sinus: How to Choose Between Excision and Open Granulation Versus Excision and Primary Closure?

Swiss Surgery ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 255-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Perruchoud ◽  
Vuilleumier ◽  
Givel
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Pilonidal Sinus ◽  
Primary Closure ◽  
Average Length ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Healing Time ◽  
Incision And Drainage ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Primary Healing

Aims: The purpose of this study was to evaluate excision and open granulation versus excision and primary closure as treatments for pilonidal sinus. Subjects and methods: We evaluated a group of 141 patients operated on for a pilonidal sinus between 1991 and 1995. Ninety patients were treated by excision and open granulation, 34 patients by excision and primary closure and 17 patients by incision and drainage, as a unique treatment of an infected pilonidal sinus. Results: The first group, receiving treatment of excision and open granulation, experienced the following outcomes: average length of hospital stay, four days; average healing time; 72 days; average number of post-operative ambulatory visits, 40; average off-work delay, 38 days; and average follow-up time, 43 months. There were five recurrences (6%) in this group during the follow-up period. For the second group treated by excision and primary closure, the corresponding outcome measurements were as follows: average length of hospital stay, four days; average healing time, 23 days; primary healing failure rate, 9%; average number of post-operative ambulatory visits, 6; average off-work delay, 21 days. The average follow-up time was 34 months, and two recurrences (6%) were observed during the follow-up period. In the third group, seventeen patients benefited from an incision and drainage as unique treatment. The mean follow-up was 37 months. Five recurrences (29%) were noticed, requiring a new operation in all the cases. Discussion and conclusion: This series of 141 patients is too limited to permit final conclusions to be drawn concerning significant advantages of one form of treatment compared to the other. Nevertheless, primary closure offers the advantages of quicker healing time, fewer post-operative visits and shorter time off work. When a primary closure can be carried out, it should be routinely considered for socio-economical and comfort reasons.

Propensity-adjusted cost analysis of radial versus femoral access for neuroendovascular procedures

2020 ◽  
pp. neurintsurg-2020-016728
Author(s):  
Joshua S Catapano ◽  
Andrew F Ducruet ◽  
Stefan W Koester ◽  
Tyler S Cole ◽  
Jacob F Baranoski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Hospital Costs ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Diagnostic Procedures ◽  
Femoral Access ◽  
Catheter Size ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Procedure Type ◽  
Angiographic Findings

BackgroundTransradial artery (TRA) access for neuroendovascular procedures is associated with fewer complications than transfemoral artery (TFA) access. This study compares hospital costs associated with TRA access to those associated with TFA access for neurointerventions.MethodsElective neuroendovascular procedures at a single center were retrospectively analyzed from October 1, 2018 to May 31, 2019. Hospital costs for each procedure were obtained from the hospital financial department. The primary outcome was the difference in the mean hospital costs after propensity adjustment between patients who underwent TRA compared with TFA access.ResultsOf the 338 elective procedures included, 63 (19%) were performed through TRA versus 275 (81%) through TFA access. Diagnostic procedures were more common in the TRA cohort (51 of 63, 81%) compared with the TFA cohort (197 of 275, 72%), but the difference was not significant (p=0.48). The TRA cohort had a shorter length of hospital stay (mean (SD) 0.3 (0.5) days) compared with the TFA cohort (mean 0.7 (1.3) days; p=0.02) and lower hospital costs (mean $12 968 ($6518) compared with the TFA cohort (mean $17 150 ($10 946); p=0.004). After propensity adjustment for age, sex, symptoms, angiographic findings, procedure type, sheath size, and catheter size, TRA access was associated with a mean hospital cost of $2514 less than that for TFA access (95% CI −$4931 to −$97; p=0.04).ConclusionNeuroendovascular procedures performed through TRA access are associated with lower hospital costs than TFA procedures. The lower cost is likely due to a decreased length of hospital stay for TRA.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document