title: [The conversion of endourological operations: a failure or healthy "clinical thinking"?].
abstract: From a lot of 2567 of endourological "low" (TURP, TURB, UIO) and "high" (PNL, URSR, URSA) interventions there are analyzed 48 cases in which there was necessary the conversion to classical surgery. In endourology, just like in laparoscopic surgery, the conversion is divided into conversion of necessity and optional conversion. A reference is made to the way of solving these conversions. The main conclusion is that the urologist has to apply equally and efficiently both classical and endourological procedures.
authors.affiliation: Clinica Urologie, Spitalul Militar Central.
authors.forename: D
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Mischianu
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Bână
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Dinu
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Vlasin
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D004724:Endoscopy / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007431:Intraoperative Complications / Q000601:surgery; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D017211:Treatment Failure; D013520:Urologic Surgical Procedures / Q000379:methods*
vernacular_title: Conversiunea operaţiilor endourologice: eşec sau "gândire clinică" sănătoasă?