| Veröffentlichte Version Download ( PDF | 1MB) Nur für Mitarbeiter des Archivs |
Outpatient versus Inpatient Ureterorenoscopy: A Retrospective Dual-Center Analysis
Müller, Maximilian Reinhard, Schnabel, Marco Julius
, Oppolzer, Immanuel Augustin
, Goßler, Christopher
, Burger, Maximilian und Thalgott, Mark
(2025)
Outpatient versus Inpatient Ureterorenoscopy: A Retrospective Dual-Center Analysis.
Urologia Internationalis, S. 1-7.
Veröffentlichungsdatum dieses Volltextes: 12 Feb 2026 10:00
Artikel
DOI zum Zitieren dieses Dokuments: 10.5283/epub.78676
Zusammenfassung
Introduction: Germany’s 2025 hospital reform promotes outpatient care, yet ureterorenoscopy (URS) remains predominantly inpatient. This study compares outcomes of outpatient versus inpatient URS. Methods: This retrospective, dual-center study compared patients who underwent URS in either an inpatient (Regensburg) or outpatient (Landshut) setting. Surgical parameters, stone-free status, and ...
Introduction: Germany’s 2025 hospital reform promotes outpatient care, yet ureterorenoscopy (URS) remains predominantly inpatient. This study compares outcomes of outpatient versus inpatient URS. Methods: This retrospective, dual-center study compared patients who underwent URS in either an inpatient (Regensburg) or outpatient (Landshut) setting. Surgical parameters, stone-free status, and postoperative complications (classified by Clavien-Dindo) were analyzed. Risk factors for complications were evaluated using chi-square testing. Results: Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. Complication rates – particularly Clavien-Dindo grade II – were higher in the outpatient cohort. Residual stone rates, surgical time, and postoperative fever did not differ significantly. Residual stones (p < 0.001) and surgical time above the median (p = 0.003) were identified as significant risk factors for postoperative complications. Conclusion: Outpatient URS is a safe and effective alternative to inpatient treatment, with comparable stone-free rates, operative times, and postoperative fever incidence. The higher rate of minor complications in the outpatient setting likely reflects a more precautionary antibiotic management strategy rather than increased clinical severity. These findings support broader implementation of outpatient URS, while emphasizing the need for antibiotic stewardship and further prospective, multicenter investigations.
Alternative Links zum Volltext
Beteiligte Einrichtungen
Details
| Dokumentenart | Artikel | ||||
| Titel eines Journals oder einer Zeitschrift | Urologia Internationalis | ||||
| Verlag: | Karger | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Seitenbereich: | S. 1-7 | ||||
| Datum | 11 Dezember 2025 | ||||
| Institutionen | Medizin > Lehrstuhl für Urologie | ||||
| Identifikationsnummer |
| ||||
| Stichwörter / Keywords | Urolithiasis, Ureteronoscopy, Outpatient urology, Outpatient care, Surgical outcomes | ||||
| Dewey-Dezimal-Klassifikation | 600 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften > 610 Medizin | ||||
| Status | Veröffentlicht | ||||
| Begutachtet | Ja, diese Version wurde begutachtet | ||||
| An der Universität Regensburg entstanden | Ja | ||||
| Dokumenten-ID | 78676 |
Downloadstatistik
Downloadstatistik