Grant D Innes1, Frank X Scheuermeyer2, Andrew D McRae1, Michael R Law3, Joel M H Teichman4, Eric Grafstein5, James E Andruchow1. 1. Departments of Emergency Medicine and Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary Cumming School of Medicine, Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of British Columbia, St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 3. Centre for Health Services and Policy Research, School for Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 4. Department of Urologic Sciences, St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 5. Department of Emergency Medicine, St. Pauls Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Early surgical intervention is an attractive option for acute ureteral colic but existing evidence does not clarify which patients benefit. We compared treatment failure rates in patients receiving early intervention and patients offered spontaneous passage to identify subgroups that benefit from early intervention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used administrative data and structured chart review to study consecutive patients attending 9 emergency departments in 2 Canadian provinces with confirmed 2.0 to 9.9 mm ureteral stones. We described patient, stone and treatment characteristics, and performed multivariable regression to identify factors associated with treatment failure, defined as intervention or hospitalization within 60 days. Our secondary outcome was emergency department revisit rate. RESULTS: Overall 1,168 of 3,081 patients underwent early intervention. Those with stones smaller than 5 mm experienced more treatment failures (31.5% vs 9.9%, difference 21.6%, 95% CI 16.9 to 21.2) and emergency department revisits (38.5% vs 19.7%, difference 18.8%, 95% CI 13.8 to 23.8) with early intervention than with spontaneous passage. Patients with stones 7.0 mm or larger experienced fewer treatment failures (34.7% vs 58.6%, risk difference 23.9%, 95% CI 11.3 to 36.6) and similar emergency department revisit rates with early intervention. Patients with 5.0 to 6.9 mm stones had fewer treatment failures with intervention (37.4% vs 55.5%, risk difference 18.1%, 95% CI 7.1 to 28.9) if stones were in the proximal or middle ureter. CONCLUSIONS: Early intervention improves outcomes for patients with large (greater than 7 mm) ureteral stones or 5 to 7 mm proximal or mid ureteral stones. Early intervention may increase morbidity for patients with stones smaller than 5 mm. These findings could help inform future guidelines.
PURPOSE: Early surgical intervention is an attractive option for acute ureteral colic but existing evidence does not clarify which patients benefit. We compared treatment failure rates in patients receiving early intervention and patients offered spontaneous passage to identify subgroups that benefit from early intervention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used administrative data and structured chart review to study consecutive patients attending 9 emergency departments in 2 Canadian provinces with confirmed 2.0 to 9.9 mm ureteral stones. We described patient, stone and treatment characteristics, and performed multivariable regression to identify factors associated with treatment failure, defined as intervention or hospitalization within 60 days. Our secondary outcome was emergency department revisit rate. RESULTS: Overall 1,168 of 3,081 patients underwent early intervention. Those with stones smaller than 5 mm experienced more treatment failures (31.5% vs 9.9%, difference 21.6%, 95% CI 16.9 to 21.2) and emergency department revisits (38.5% vs 19.7%, difference 18.8%, 95% CI 13.8 to 23.8) with early intervention than with spontaneous passage. Patients with stones 7.0 mm or larger experienced fewer treatment failures (34.7% vs 58.6%, risk difference 23.9%, 95% CI 11.3 to 36.6) and similar emergency department revisit rates with early intervention. Patients with 5.0 to 6.9 mm stones had fewer treatment failures with intervention (37.4% vs 55.5%, risk difference 18.1%, 95% CI 7.1 to 28.9) if stones were in the proximal or middle ureter. CONCLUSIONS: Early intervention improves outcomes for patients with large (greater than 7 mm) ureteral stones or 5 to 7 mm proximal or mid ureteral stones. Early intervention may increase morbidity for patients with stones smaller than 5 mm. These findings could help inform future guidelines.
Authors: David-Dan Nguyen; Iman Sadri; Kyle Law; Naeem Bhojani; Dean S Elterman; Ahmed S Zakaria; Adel Arezki; Franck Bruyère; Luca Cindolo; Giovanni Ferrari; Carlos Vasquez-Lastra; Tiago Borelli-Bovo; Edgardo F Becher; Hannes Cash; Maximillian Reimann; Enrique Rijo; Vincent Misrai; Kevin C Zorn Journal: World J Urol Date: 2021-01-03 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Faris Abushamma; Mahfouz Ktaifan; Abdoh Abdallah; Mohammad Alkarajeh; Mosab Maree; Ahmed Awadghanem; Ahmad Jaradat; Amir Aghbar; Sa'ed H Zyoud; Francis X Keeley Journal: Int J Gen Med Date: 2021-07-30