Kadir Akgül - Academia.edu (original) (raw)
Uploads
Papers by Kadir Akgül
Yeni Üroloji Dergisi, 2019
Uzun yıllardan beri steril kabul edilen üriner sistemin yapılan çalışmalarda aslında bağırsaklar ... more Uzun yıllardan beri steril kabul edilen üriner sistemin yapılan çalışmalarda aslında bağırsaklar ve cilt gibi bir floraya sahip olabileceği gündeme gelmiştir. Üriner sistem mikrobiyotasının varlığı üzerine yapılan çalışmalar sonucunda bazı ürolojik hastalıkların tedavisinde probiyotiklerin ve prebiyotiklerin kullanılıp kullanılamayacağı sorgulanmaktadır. Biz bu derlememizde üriner mikrobiyota ve hastalıklarla olan ilişkilerini derlemeyi amaçladık.
Türk Üroloji Dergisi/Turkish Journal of Urology, 2010
ABSTRACT Objective: It was aimed to compare the clinical efficacy of Stone Cone™ and NTrap™ for p... more ABSTRACT Objective: It was aimed to compare the clinical efficacy of Stone Cone™ and NTrap™ for preventing retropulsion in ureterorenoscopic stone surgery.Materials and methods: Stone Cone™ or NTrap™ were used randomly in patients who were operated with uretroscopic method for ureter stone in our clinic between June 2008-August 2009. Routine procedures that are used in ureterorenoscopic stone surgery were applied to all patients. The patients who had opaque, upper ureteral stones were included in this study. Stone Cone™ catheter was used in 72 patients, NTrap™ catheter was used in 57 patients. The existence of a stone that was larger or equal to 4 mm and/or migrated proximally in the urinary system radiograpy at postoperative 24 hours were accepted as failure. Results: Catheter couldn’t be passed to the proximal of the stone in 4 (%5.6) of 72 cases with Stone Cone™ and in 8 (%14) of 54 cases with NTrap™. Proximal retropulsion of the stone was seen in 7 (%10.3) of 68 cases and in 2 (%4.1) of 49 cases that Stone Cone™ and NTrap™ could be used respectively. According to these two criteria, Stone Cone™ was successful in 61 (%84.7) of 72 cases, NTrap™ was successful in 47 (%82.4) of 57 cases. There was no statistically significant difference between two products in term of the success rates (p>0.05).Conclusion: Both of these products are the catheters that can be used safely in ureterorenoscopic surgery and increase the surgery success significantly. No statistically significant difference was found between Stone Cone™ and NTrap™ in terms of clinical efficacy.
Yeni Üroloji Dergisi, 2019
Uzun yıllardan beri steril kabul edilen üriner sistemin yapılan çalışmalarda aslında bağırsaklar ... more Uzun yıllardan beri steril kabul edilen üriner sistemin yapılan çalışmalarda aslında bağırsaklar ve cilt gibi bir floraya sahip olabileceği gündeme gelmiştir. Üriner sistem mikrobiyotasının varlığı üzerine yapılan çalışmalar sonucunda bazı ürolojik hastalıkların tedavisinde probiyotiklerin ve prebiyotiklerin kullanılıp kullanılamayacağı sorgulanmaktadır. Biz bu derlememizde üriner mikrobiyota ve hastalıklarla olan ilişkilerini derlemeyi amaçladık.
Türk Üroloji Dergisi/Turkish Journal of Urology, 2010
ABSTRACT Objective: It was aimed to compare the clinical efficacy of Stone Cone™ and NTrap™ for p... more ABSTRACT Objective: It was aimed to compare the clinical efficacy of Stone Cone™ and NTrap™ for preventing retropulsion in ureterorenoscopic stone surgery.Materials and methods: Stone Cone™ or NTrap™ were used randomly in patients who were operated with uretroscopic method for ureter stone in our clinic between June 2008-August 2009. Routine procedures that are used in ureterorenoscopic stone surgery were applied to all patients. The patients who had opaque, upper ureteral stones were included in this study. Stone Cone™ catheter was used in 72 patients, NTrap™ catheter was used in 57 patients. The existence of a stone that was larger or equal to 4 mm and/or migrated proximally in the urinary system radiograpy at postoperative 24 hours were accepted as failure. Results: Catheter couldn’t be passed to the proximal of the stone in 4 (%5.6) of 72 cases with Stone Cone™ and in 8 (%14) of 54 cases with NTrap™. Proximal retropulsion of the stone was seen in 7 (%10.3) of 68 cases and in 2 (%4.1) of 49 cases that Stone Cone™ and NTrap™ could be used respectively. According to these two criteria, Stone Cone™ was successful in 61 (%84.7) of 72 cases, NTrap™ was successful in 47 (%82.4) of 57 cases. There was no statistically significant difference between two products in term of the success rates (p>0.05).Conclusion: Both of these products are the catheters that can be used safely in ureterorenoscopic surgery and increase the surgery success significantly. No statistically significant difference was found between Stone Cone™ and NTrap™ in terms of clinical efficacy.