Sebastian Nestler1, B Witte2, L Schilchegger2, J Jones2. 1. Department of Urology, Hochtaunusklinik Bad Homburg, Bad Homburg, Germany. sebastian-nestler@web.de. 2. Department of Urology, Hochtaunusklinik Bad Homburg, Bad Homburg, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of different diameters of ureteral stents (F4.7, F6, and F7) on quality of life regarding the subdomains of the Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire. MATERIALS AND METHODS:All patients undergoing URS between April 2016 and July 2017 were prospectively randomised for ureteral stents F4.7, F6 and F7, respectively. All patients with other pathologies than a ureter stone, ureteral stents on both sides or other therapy than a secondary URS were excluded. Readmitted patients were interviewed using the USSQ. Furthermore, success rates of the second URS were also noted. RESULTS:Between April 2016 to July 2017, 181 patients were included, 48 with a ureteral stent F4.6, 66 with F6 and 67 with F7. No significant differences in age, gender or position of the stones before URS were found (all p > 0.5). Comparing scores of USSQ between F4.7 and F6 or F6 and F7, scores were in favour of the smaller stent, but significance was only reached in "Work performance score" (F6-F7, p = 0.04) and "Urinary index score" (F4.7-F6, p = 0.004). When comparing F4.7 with F7, significant differences in all subgroups in favour of F4.7 were documented (all p < 0.03). Surgical success of the second URS was comparable in all groups (all above 82%, p > 0.15). CONCLUSION:Discomfort and pain increase with the diameter of the indwelling ureter stent, while the success of the following URS is not compromised by a ureter stent with a smaller diameter. Therefore, ureteral stents with a small diameter should be preferred.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of different diameters of ureteral stents (F4.7, F6, and F7) on quality of life regarding the subdomains of the Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients undergoing URS between April 2016 and July 2017 were prospectively randomised for ureteral stents F4.7, F6 and F7, respectively. All patients with other pathologies than a ureter stone, ureteral stents on both sides or other therapy than a secondary URS were excluded. Readmitted patients were interviewed using the USSQ. Furthermore, success rates of the second URS were also noted. RESULTS: Between April 2016 to July 2017, 181 patients were included, 48 with a ureteral stent F4.6, 66 with F6 and 67 with F7. No significant differences in age, gender or position of the stones before URS were found (all p > 0.5). Comparing scores of USSQ between F4.7 and F6 or F6 and F7, scores were in favour of the smaller stent, but significance was only reached in "Work performance score" (F6-F7, p = 0.04) and "Urinary index score" (F4.7-F6, p = 0.004). When comparing F4.7 with F7, significant differences in all subgroups in favour of F4.7 were documented (all p < 0.03). Surgical success of the second URS was comparable in all groups (all above 82%, p > 0.15). CONCLUSION: Discomfort and pain increase with the diameter of the indwelling ureter stent, while the success of the following URS is not compromised by a ureter stent with a smaller diameter. Therefore, ureteral stents with a small diameter should be preferred.