Marc Chalhoub1,2, Jules Kohaut1,2, Nicolas Vinit1,2, Nathalie Botto1, Yves Aigrain1,2, Yves Héloury1,2, Henri Lottmann1, Thomas Blanc3,4,5. 1. Service de Chirurgie Viscérale et Urologie Pédiatriques, APHP, Hôpital Necker, Paris, France. 2. Université de Paris, Paris, France. 3. Service de Chirurgie Viscérale et Urologie Pédiatriques, APHP, Hôpital Necker, Paris, France. thomas.blanc@aphp.fr. 4. Université de Paris, Paris, France. thomas.blanc@aphp.fr. 5. Département Croissance et Signalisation, Hôpital Necker Enfants Malades, Institut Necker Enfants Malades, INSERM U1151-CNRS UMR 8253, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France. thomas.blanc@aphp.fr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The need for surgical removal of a double-J ureteral stent (DJUS) is considered one of its disadvantages. Apart from increased cost, repeated exposure to general anesthesia is a concern in children. Alternative techniques have been described, all failing to become integrated into mainstream practice. Stents with a distal magnetic end, although introduced in the early 1980s, have only recently gained acceptance. We report the feasibility and safety of insertion and removal of a magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent (MEDJUS) in a pediatric population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the use of the Magnetic Black-Star Urotech® MEDJUS between 11/2016 and 12/2019 in children. Stents were removed in the outpatient clinic using a transurethral catheter with a magnetic tip. RESULTS: MEDJUS insertion was attempted in 100 patients (65 boys). Mean age was 7.8 years (0.5-18). The stent was placed in an antegrade procedure (n = 47), by a retrograde route (n = 10), and during open surgery (n = 43). Stent insertion was successful in 84 cases (84%). All 16 failures occurred during the antegrade approach in laparoscopic pyeloplasty, with inability to push the stent and its magnet through the ureterovesical junction in 14. Magnetic removal was attempted in 83 patients, successful in 81 (98%). There was no added morbidity with the MEDJUS. CONCLUSIONS: The use of MEDJUS is a safe and effective strategy that obviates the need for additional general anesthesia in children. Its insertion is similar to that with regular DJUS, and its easy and less time-consuming removal benefits both the patient and the hospital and validates its clinical use.
PURPOSE: The need for surgical removal of a double-J ureteral stent (DJUS) is considered one of its disadvantages. Apart from increased cost, repeated exposure to general anesthesia is a concern in children. Alternative techniques have been described, all failing to become integrated into mainstream practice. Stents with a distal magnetic end, although introduced in the early 1980s, have only recently gained acceptance. We report the feasibility and safety of insertion and removal of a magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent (MEDJUS) in a pediatric population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the use of the Magnetic Black-Star Urotech® MEDJUS between 11/2016 and 12/2019 in children. Stents were removed in the outpatient clinic using a transurethral catheter with a magnetic tip. RESULTS: MEDJUS insertion was attempted in 100 patients (65 boys). Mean age was 7.8 years (0.5-18). The stent was placed in an antegrade procedure (n = 47), by a retrograde route (n = 10), and during open surgery (n = 43). Stent insertion was successful in 84 cases (84%). All 16 failures occurred during the antegrade approach in laparoscopic pyeloplasty, with inability to push the stent and its magnet through the ureterovesical junction in 14. Magnetic removal was attempted in 83 patients, successful in 81 (98%). There was no added morbidity with the MEDJUS. CONCLUSIONS: The use of MEDJUS is a safe and effective strategy that obviates the need for additional general anesthesia in children. Its insertion is similar to that with regular DJUS, and its easy and less time-consuming removal benefits both the patient and the hospital and validates its clinical use.
Entities:
Keywords:
Children; Magnetic stent; Removal; Ureteral stent; Urology
Authors: Steeve Doizi; Guido Kamphuis; Guido Giusti; J L Palmero; J M Patterson; Silvia Proietti; Michael Straub; Jean de la Rosette; Olivier Traxer Journal: World J Urol Date: 2016-12-17 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Ryan P Donahue; Andrew W Stamm; Robert P Gibbons; Christopher R Porter; Kathleen C Kobashi; John M Corman; Una J Lee Journal: Urology Date: 2018-03-12 Impact factor: 2.649