Literature DB >> 16600353

In vitro evaluation of ureteral stent compression.

Kari Hendlin1, Krishna Vedula, Christina Horn, Manoj Monga.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the force required to radially compress ureteral stents and the impact of compression on stent performance across a broad range of stent sizes and manufacturers.
METHODS: Fourteen ureteral stents ranging in size from 6F to 10.3F were evaluated for radial compression using an MTS Micro Bionix Testing System using Testworks II software, 5N load cell, vibration isolation table, and socket set screws with rounded caps. Radial compression was exerted in 0.2-mm increments. Cycles of compression and a 100-second hold time were repeated for each stent to maximal compression. Three trials were completed for each stent. The Young's Modulus, E, was calculated from each trial using the engineering stress. Simultaneous flow data using normal saline were collected for the Amplatz stent.
RESULTS: The Cook C-Flex (E = 30,355 +/- 910 Pa), Microvasive Percuflex Plus 6F (E = 28,973 +/- 250 Pa), Cook EndoSof (E = 28,403 +/- 471 Pa), and Fossa Open Lumen (E = 28,627 +/- 5,338) were the most resistant to compression and the Cook Amplatz 10.2F (E = 11,922 +/- 220 Pa) and Microvasive Percuflex Plus 10.3F (E = 8,247 +/- 286 Pa) were the least resistant to compression. Stress relaxation occurred similarly in all stents. Flow through the Cook Amplatz stent decreased at a rate of 5 mL/s/mm of compression linearly (R2 = 0.95).
CONCLUSIONS: Stents resistant to radial compression are critical for function in the face of extrinsic ureteral obstruction. The Cook C-Flex ureteral stent resisted extrinsic compressive forces best. Although large-lumen stents are often used in this clinical situation, they were the most susceptible to compressive forces.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16600353     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2005.10.038

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  7 in total

1.  Changing to a loop-type ureteral stent decreases patients' stent-related symptoms.

Authors:  Takashi Kawahara; Hiroki Ito; Hideyuki Terao; Takehiko Ogawa; Hiroji Uemura; Yoshinobu Kubota; Junichi Matsuzaki
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2012-08-17

Review 2.  [Management of ureteral obstruction : Value of percutaneous nephrostomy and ureteral stents].

Authors:  C Netsch; B Becker; A J Gross
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 3.  Ureteral stent symptoms and associated infections: a biomaterials perspective.

Authors:  Ben H Chew; Dirk Lange
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2009-07-14       Impact factor: 14.432

4.  Risk factors in the prediction of long-term patency of Resonance metallic ureteric stent in malignant ureteric obstruction.

Authors:  Brian S H Ho; Peter K F Chiu; Wayne Lam; Julius H F Wong; Charles K W Wong; Terence C T Lai; Chiu-Fung Tsang; Ada T L Ng; Chi-Kwok Chan; Wai-Kit Ma; Chi-Fai Ng; James H L Tsu
Journal:  BJUI Compass       Date:  2020-04-22

5.  Failure of ureteral stents subject to extrinsic ureteral obstruction and stent occlusions.

Authors:  Tal Amitay-Rosen; Alon Nissan; Yaniv Shilo; Ishai Dror; Brian Berkowitz
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2021-02-17       Impact factor: 2.370

6.  Metal ureteral stents in chronic obstructions.

Authors:  Daniel Yachia
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2011-07

7.  Impact of loop-tail ureteral stents on ureteral stent-related symptoms immediately after ureteroscopic lithotripsy: Comparison with pigtail ureteral stents.

Authors:  Makoto Taguchi; Takaaki Inoue; Kouei Muguruma; Takashi Murota; Hidefumi Kinoshita; Tadashi Matsuda
Journal:  Investig Clin Urol       Date:  2017-10-23
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.