Literature DB >> 21168868

The impact of proximal stone burden on the management of encrusted and retained ureteral stents.

John W Weedin1, Michael Coburn, Richard E Link.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Managing the encrusted and retained ureteral stent is a potentially complex challenge. To improve surgical planning, we hypothesized that proximal stone burden is the most important factor associated with complicated removal, and that computerized tomography more accurately estimates stone burden than plain film x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Records were reviewed of patients undergoing surgical removal of an encrusted and retained ureteral stent or nephrostomy at Ben Taub General Hospital from 2007 to 2009. Preoperative imaging consisted of a plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder and/or computerized tomography of the abdomen/pelvis. Each encrusted tube was assessed using the FECal (forgotten, encrusted, calcified) grading system and associated stone burden was calculated. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine factors associated with the need for multiple surgeries.
RESULTS: A total of 55 encrusted and retained ureteral stents and 1 nephrostomy were removed from 52 patients. Mean tube duration was 24.9 months. Most tubes were removed endoscopically (94.2%). Of the patients 21.2% required multiple surgical procedures to remove each tube. Computerized tomography graded stone burden more accurately than plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder (94.9% vs 64.4%, p = 0.01). Plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder underestimated proximal stone burden in 44.4% of patients who underwent multiple surgeries. When dividing stone burden into 3 categories (0 to 100, 101 to 400 and greater than 401 mm(2)) only proximal stone burden correlated with multiple surgeries and surgical complications (p = 0.01 for both). On multivariate analysis only proximal stone burden was associated with multiple surgeries to remove each tube (OR 12.1, 95% CI 1.5-95.9, p = 0.02 for 101 to 400 mm(2) and OR 18.1, 95% CI 1.7-192.8, p = 0.02 for greater than 401 mm(2)).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with encrusted and retained ureteral stents accurate determination of the proximal stone burden, preferably by computerized tomography, is important for surgical counseling and planning. Copyright Â
© 2011 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21168868     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.09.085

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  9 in total

1.  Do ureteral stent diameter and length or patient demographics play a role in stent encrustation?

Authors:  Zachary M Connelly; Haley Pilet; Charles D Rees; Coleman McFerrin; Ahmad Azzawe; Mohamed E Ahmed; Nazih Khater
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2022-09       Impact factor: 2.052

2.  Endourologic Management of Stent Retained Over 22 Years in Patient with Duplicated Collecting System.

Authors:  William C Daly; Johann P Ingimarsson
Journal:  J Endourol Case Rep       Date:  2020-12-29

3.  Management of Forgotten Ureteral Stents: Relationship Between Indwelling Time and Required Treatment Approaches.

Authors:  Hacı Polat; Mehmet Özgür Yücel; Mehmet M Utangaç; Can Benlioğlu; Alper Gök; Ali Çift; Bedreddin Kalyenci; Uğur Lök; Umut Gülaçtı
Journal:  Balkan Med J       Date:  2017-04-06       Impact factor: 2.021

4.  Forgotten double-J stent: Experience of a tertiary care center.

Authors:  Vinayak Vajpeyi; Saurabh Chipde; Faiz Ahmed Khan; Sanjay Parashar
Journal:  Urol Ann       Date:  2020-04-14

5.  Endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in the prone-split leg position for successful single session removal of an encrusted ureteral stent: a case report.

Authors:  Daming Wang; Hongliang Sun; Lei Chen; Zhiqi Liu; Dazhao Zhang; Dexin Yu; Demao Ding
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2020-04-06       Impact factor: 2.264

Review 6.  Endourological management of encrusted ureteral stents: an up-to-date guide and treatment algorithm on behalf of the European Association of Urology Young Academic Urology Urolithiasis Group.

Authors:  Patrick Juliebø-Jones; Amelia Pietropaolo; Mathias Sørstrand Æsøy; Øyvind Ulvik; Christian Beisland; Ewa Bres-Niewada; Bhaskar K Somani
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2021-12-06

7.  Combined endoscopic surgery in the prone-split leg position for successful single-session removal of an encrusted ureteral stent: a case report.

Authors:  Tetsuya Isero; Shuzo Hamamoto; Satoshi Koiwa; Hiroyuki Kamiya; Yoshihiro Hashimoto; Takahiro Yasui; Yutaka Iwase; Kenjiro Kohri
Journal:  J Med Case Rep       Date:  2014-04-17

8.  Patients with encrusted ureteral stents can be treated by a single session combined endourological approach.

Authors:  Roberto Iglesias Lopes; Rodrigo Perrella; Carlos Hirokatsu Watanabe; Fabricio Beltrame; Alexandre Danilovic; Claudio Bovolenta Murta; Joaquim Francisco de Almeida Claro; Fabio Carvalho Vicentini
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2021 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.541

9.  Does potassium citrate administration change the type and composition of encrusted material on Double-J stent compared to primary stone?

Authors:  Abdolreza Mohammadi; Mohammad Mehdi Rakebi; Maryam Gholamnezhad; Mahin Ahmadi Pishkuhi; Seyed Mohammad Kazem Aghamir
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2021-05-29       Impact factor: 2.370

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.