File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Conference Paper: Endoscopic intervention of ureteric stricture: how have we been doing in the past 10 years?

TitleEndoscopic intervention of ureteric stricture: how have we been doing in the past 10 years?
Authors
Issue Date2017
PublisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.bjui.org/
Citation
22nd Annual Scientific Meeting of the Hong Kong Urological Association, Hong Kong, 20 November 2016. In BJU International, 2017, v. 119 n. suppl. 3, p. 14 How to Cite?
AbstractObjective: To examine the outcome ofendoscopic intervention of ureteric stric-ture and identify the factors affectingoperative outcomes.Patients and Methods: We retrospectivelyreviewed data of patients underwent endo-scopic intervention of ureteric stricture inthe period between January 2006 and June2016 in Queen Mary and Tung WahHospitals. Primary endpoint was stricturerecurrence, defined as radiological evi-dence of persistent obstruction, and/or theneed of drainage of the obstructed system.Results: During the studied period, endo-scopic intervention was performed on 83renal units in 64 patients. Majority (60%)of strictures were urolithiasis-related. Bal-loon dilatation was most commonly used(61%). Outcome was not significantly different among serial dilatation, balloondilatation, laser stricturotomy and combi-nation of techniques. The overall 1-yearand 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS)was 50% and 44% respectively. Second ormore attempts had poorer outcome thanfirst attempt (5-year RFS 24% vs. 59%,p = 0.03). Urolithiasis-related stricture hadlower recurrence rate than stricture ofother aetiology (5-year RFS 66% vs. 28%,p = 0.00); while stricture length, stricturelevel, endoscopic intervention technique, orpre-operative renal unit differential func-tion had no association with recurrence.Conclusion: It is reasonable to firstattempt endoscopic intervention forurolithiasis-related ureteric strictures. Stric-tures of other aetiology, however, had pooroutcome if managed endoscopically.
DescriptionAbstract
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/241674
ISSN
2017 Impact Factor: 4.688
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 2.009

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLai, TCT-
dc.contributor.authorMa, WK-
dc.contributor.authorTsang, CF-
dc.contributor.authorWong, JKW-
dc.contributor.authorHo, SHB-
dc.contributor.authorNg, ATL-
dc.contributor.authorTsu, HLJ-
dc.contributor.authorYiu, MK-
dc.date.accessioned2017-06-20T01:46:59Z-
dc.date.available2017-06-20T01:46:59Z-
dc.date.issued2017-
dc.identifier.citation22nd Annual Scientific Meeting of the Hong Kong Urological Association, Hong Kong, 20 November 2016. In BJU International, 2017, v. 119 n. suppl. 3, p. 14-
dc.identifier.issn1464-4096-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/241674-
dc.descriptionAbstract-
dc.description.abstractObjective: To examine the outcome ofendoscopic intervention of ureteric stric-ture and identify the factors affectingoperative outcomes.Patients and Methods: We retrospectivelyreviewed data of patients underwent endo-scopic intervention of ureteric stricture inthe period between January 2006 and June2016 in Queen Mary and Tung WahHospitals. Primary endpoint was stricturerecurrence, defined as radiological evi-dence of persistent obstruction, and/or theneed of drainage of the obstructed system.Results: During the studied period, endo-scopic intervention was performed on 83renal units in 64 patients. Majority (60%)of strictures were urolithiasis-related. Bal-loon dilatation was most commonly used(61%). Outcome was not significantly different among serial dilatation, balloondilatation, laser stricturotomy and combi-nation of techniques. The overall 1-yearand 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS)was 50% and 44% respectively. Second ormore attempts had poorer outcome thanfirst attempt (5-year RFS 24% vs. 59%,p = 0.03). Urolithiasis-related stricture hadlower recurrence rate than stricture ofother aetiology (5-year RFS 66% vs. 28%,p = 0.00); while stricture length, stricturelevel, endoscopic intervention technique, orpre-operative renal unit differential func-tion had no association with recurrence.Conclusion: It is reasonable to firstattempt endoscopic intervention forurolithiasis-related ureteric strictures. Stric-tures of other aetiology, however, had pooroutcome if managed endoscopically.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.bjui.org/-
dc.relation.ispartofBJU International-
dc.rightsPreprint This is the pre-peer reviewed version of the following article: [FULL CITE], which has been published in final form at [Link to final article]. Authors are not required to remove preprints posted prior to acceptance of the submitted version. Postprint This is the accepted version of the following article: [full citation], which has been published in final form at [Link to final article].-
dc.titleEndoscopic intervention of ureteric stricture: how have we been doing in the past 10 years?-
dc.typeConference_Paper-
dc.identifier.emailMa, WK: mwk054@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailHo, SHB: hobrian@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailTsu, HLJ: jamestsu@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailYiu, MK: pmkyiu@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/bju.13768-
dc.identifier.hkuros272646-
dc.identifier.volume119-
dc.identifier.issuesuppl. 3-
dc.identifier.spage14-
dc.identifier.epage14-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdom-
dc.customcontrol.immutablecsl 170713-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats