Literature DB >> 25019375

Patient experiences and preferences with ureteral stent removal.

Jeffrey C Loh-Doyle1, Roger K Low, Manoj Monga, Mike M Nguyen.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Ureteral stent removal is a source of patient morbidity. We surveyed 599 patients to evaluate their experiences and identify the preferred method of stent removal.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Visitors to a kidney stone website were invited to participate. Respondents were asked how their ureteral stent was removed? Pain during and after the procedure, patient experiences, and preferences regarding stent removal were queried. Chi-square and ANOVA tests were used to identify significant differences among removal methods.
RESULTS: Five hundred seventy-one respondents were included in the study. The majority of stents (44%) were removed by office cystoscopy while 39% had their stents removed by string. Mean pain during stent removal was 4.8 out of 10 with 57% reporting moderate-to-severe pain levels of 4 or more. Removal by office cystoscopy resulted in the highest experienced pain (5.3). Thirty-two percent reported delayed severe pain after stent removal, including 9% who returned for emergency care. Removal by string resulted in more emergency room visits when compared to cystoscopy. Willingness to undergo the same removal technique was lowest for those who underwent office cystoscopy and highest for operating room cystoscopy. Being informed of why a stent was placed and the removal process was of high priority for respondents.
CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients report moderate-to-severe pain with stent removal and a third report delayed significant pain after stent removal. Variations exist in the patient experience with stent removal based on the method used. More research is needed to identify effective ways to prevent or manage stent-removal-related adverse events.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25019375      PMCID: PMC4287107          DOI: 10.1089/end.2014.0402

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endourol        ISSN: 0892-7790            Impact factor:   2.942


  17 in total

1.  Routine stenting after ureteroscopy: think again.

Authors:  Francis X Keeley; Anthony G Timoney
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2007-01-30       Impact factor: 20.096

2.  Practice patterns of ureteral stenting after routine ureteroscopic stone surgery: a survey of practicing urologists.

Authors:  Brian K Auge; Jamey A Sarvis; James O L'esperance; Glenn M Preminger
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 2.942

3.  Do ureteric stent extraction strings affect stent-related quality of life or complications after ureteroscopy for urolithiasis: a prospective randomised control trial.

Authors:  Kerri T Barnes; Megan T Bing; Chad R Tracy
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 5.588

4.  Rise in emergency department visits of pediatric patients for renal colic from 1999 to 2008.

Authors:  Neeraja Kairam; John R Allegra; Barnet Eskin
Journal:  Pediatr Emerg Care       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 1.454

5.  Epinephrine produces a beta-adrenergic receptor-mediated mechanical hyperalgesia and in vitro sensitization of rat nociceptors.

Authors:  S G Khasar; G McCarter; J D Levine
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Epidemiological trends in pediatric urolithiasis at United States freestanding pediatric hospitals.

Authors:  Jonathan C Routh; Dionne A Graham; Caleb P Nelson
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2010-07-21       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  The impact of prostate biopsy on patient well-being: a prospective study of pain, anxiety and erectile dysfunction.

Authors:  A Zisman; D Leibovici; J Kleinmann; Y I Siegel; A Lindner
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Indwelling ureteral stents: evaluation of symptoms, quality of life and utility.

Authors:  H B Joshi; A Stainthorpe; R P MacDonagh; F X Keeley; A G Timoney; Michael J Barry
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Hospitalizations for pediatric stone disease in United States, 2002-2007.

Authors:  Nicol Corbin Bush; Lin Xu; Benjamin J Brown; Michael S Holzer; Aaron Gingrich; Brett Schuler; Liyue Tong; Linda A Baker
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2010-01-22       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  A prospective evaluation of pain associated with stone passage, stents, and stent removal using a visual analog scale.

Authors:  Franklin E Kuehhas; Arkadus Miernik; Varun Sharma; Sabina Sevcenco; Elchin Javadli; Ralf Herwig; Tibor Szarvas; Martin Schoenthaler; Georg Schatzl; Peter Weibl
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2013-06-14       Impact factor: 2.649

View more
  10 in total

1.  Evaluation of pain perception associated with use of the magnetic-end ureteric double-J stent for short-term ureteric stenting.

Authors:  S Sevcenco; K Eredics; L Lusuardi; Hans Christoph Klingler
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2017-12-13       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Pilot Study to Determine Optimal Stent Duration Following Ureteroscopy: Three versus Seven days.

Authors:  Charles J Paul; Nathan A Brooks; George M Ghareeb; Chad R Tracy
Journal:  Curr Urol       Date:  2017-12-30

3.  Rethinking of ureteral stent removal using an extraction string; what patients feel and what is patients' preference? : a randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Dae Ji Kim; Jeong Hwan Son; Seok Heun Jang; Jae Won Lee; Dae Sung Cho; Chae Hong Lim
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2015-12-09       Impact factor: 2.264

4.  Cystoscopic stent removal using a guidewire loop.

Authors:  Ajay T Oswal; Pankaj N Maheshwari; Dhruti Amlani
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2017 Jul-Sep

Review 5.  Ureteric stents on extraction strings: a systematic review of literature.

Authors:  Rachel Oliver; Hannah Wells; Olivier Traxer; Thomas Knoll; Omar Aboumarzouk; Chandra S Biyani; Bhaskar K Somani
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2016-06-20       Impact factor: 3.436

6.  The use of a string with a stent for self-removal following ureteroscopy: A safe practice to remain.

Authors:  Karen M Doersch; Amr Elmekresh; G Luke Machen; Marawan M El Tayeb
Journal:  Arab J Urol       Date:  2018-06-27

7.  Pooled analysis of efficacy and safety of ureteral stent removal using an extraction string.

Authors:  Xujie Sun; Liying Dong; Tao Chen; Zhongyi Huang; Xuebao Zhang; Jitao Wu; Chunhua Lin; Yuanshan Cui
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 1.817

8.  Novel method to decrease the exposure time of the extraction string of the ureteral stent and its efficiency and safety verification in the clinic.

Authors:  WenGang Hu; YaJun Song; Yang Li; YueHua Li; Jiao Mu; Xiao Zhong; YiRong Chen; RongHua Wu; Ya Xiao; ChiBing Huang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-11-16       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 9.  Ureteral stents in urolithiasis.

Authors:  Matthias Beysens; Thomas O Tailly
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2018-07-25

10.  The Efficacy and Safety of Ureteric Stent Removal with Strings versus No Strings: Which Is Better?

Authors:  Zhenkai Luo; Binbin Jiao; Hang Zhao; Tao Huang; Lin Geng; Guan Zhang
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-10-15       Impact factor: 3.411

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.