Literature DB >> 35774646

Giant Bladder Stone: A Case Report.

Stamatios Katsimperis1, Konstantinos Pikramenos1, Konstantinos Livadas1, Nikolaos Chatzikrachtis1, Themistoklis T Bellos1.   

Abstract

Giant bladder stones, weighing more than 100 g, are a rare entity in western practice, usually associated with bladder outlet obstruction, urinary tract infections, or the presence of intravesical foreign bodies. We present a case of a 53-year-old man with a giant bladder stone weighing 600 g. He underwent suprapubic cystolithotomy, had no major surgical complications, and was discharged with a significantly improved urine flow stream.
Copyright © 2022, Katsimperis et al.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bladder calculus; cystolithotomy; cystolithotripsy; giant bladder stone; lithiasis; stone surgery; urinary lithiasis; urology; vesical calculi

Year:  2022        PMID: 35774646      PMCID: PMC9239294          DOI: 10.7759/cureus.25439

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cureus        ISSN: 2168-8184


Introduction

Prevalence of urolithiasis in developed countries is between 4% and 20% [1]. Bladder stones appear less common and they usually weigh less than 100 g [1]. Improved healthcare facilities and easy access to them are a reason for this. Thus, the incidence is higher in developing countries [2]. Having a wide presentation ranging from asymptomatic to lower abdominal pain, dysuria, gross hematuria or urinary retention can make the diagnosis challenging [3]. The treatment options are also many. Endourology, open surgery, or even medical therapy can be used. Here, we report a case of a giant bladder stone in an otherwise healthy man who presented to the emergency department with intermittent gross hematuria and dysuria.

Case presentation

A 53-year-old man presented to the emergency department complaining of dysuria and intermittent gross hematuria. From his medical history, he had an open ureterolithotomy surgery on his right ureter 15 years ago. He reported having a pigtail end left in his right ureter from this surgery due to an unsuccessful attempt to remove it and negligence of his own to find a solution. An x-ray showed a bladder stone measuring 9 x 8.7 cm and a stone in his right kidney measuring 4.7 x 3.7 cm (Figure 1). The pigtail remnant he reported was also visible. Mild bilateral hydronephrosis was revealed in the ultrasonography. Urine lab work showed 30-35 red blood cells per high power field and more than 100 pus cells per high power field. His blood examinations were normal. Digital rectal examination revealed a normal prostate.
Figure 1

KUB x-ray demonstrating the stone

KUB: kidney, ureter, and bladder

KUB x-ray demonstrating the stone

KUB: kidney, ureter, and bladder The patient received intravenous ciprofloxacin and underwent open cystolithotomy, which revealed a giant stone weighting 600 g (Figure 2). Both suprapubic catheter and urethral foley catheter were placed. They were removed on postoperative days four and six, respectively, and the patient was discharged on postoperative day eight. On follow-up, he had improved urine flow stream and no hematuria. Two months later, we removed the pigtail mentioned before. We did not take it out during the cystolithotomy because a ureteroscopy was needed to remove it.
Figure 2

The 600 g bladder stone after its removal

Discussion

Bladder stones comprise approximately 5% of all cases of urolithiasis [4]. As for those weighing more than 100 g, they are a very rare entity with fewer than 100 cases reported [5]. Most common underlying pathology is voiding dysfunction, chronic infection or presence of intravesical foreign bodies. Benign prostatic enlargement in men [6] and urethral obstruction from pelvic prolapse or cystocele in women are to be blamed [4,7]. Foreign bodies such as forgotten double-J stents or slings that accidentally passed through the bladder are often encrusted and they serve as nidi for stones. Generally, any disorder favoring urinary stasis facilitates stone formation [8]. Usually, the diagnosis is set by ordinary assessment routines such as a plain kidney, ureter, and bladder (KUB) x-ray or an ultrasound scan of the bladder with high sensitivity and specificity rates ranging between 20-83% and 98-100% respectively [9]. When possible, prior to treatment some more exams should be undertaken such as uroflowmetry, urinalysis, urine culture and metabolic assessment, including serum creatinine, calcium, uric acid, sodium and potassium. They will help identify the underlying cause in order to reduce recurrence rates. Conservative management includes medical treatment with oral urine alkalization for uric acid stones with urine pH > 6.5. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy is another option for the treatment of bladder stones. It is a safe and effective method for patients with high anesthetic risk, patients fearing anesthesia or endoscopic procedures, and patients who have difficulty in positioning. The treatment of choice for bladder stones is usually transurethral cystolithotripsy as it has high stone free rate, shorter hospital stay than other procedures and less pain [10]. However, in selected cases such as very large stones, transurethral cystolithotripsy is not feasible and open cystolithotomy is considered as first line treatment. In contrast to transurethral cystolithotripsy that can be performed under spinal anesthesia, open cystolithotomy requires general anesthesia to be done. This might be a limitation for some patients with certain comorbidities. Other limitations include previous operations or radiation in the abdomen-pelvis that might make the surgery impracticable. Despite these limitations, open cystolithotomy, when feasible, is very effective and lacks complications such as urethral strictures that one may face after transurethral cystolithotripsy [11]. Patient also becomes total stone-free in most cases in one session, something that could not be achieved with transurethral cystolithotripsy in such big stones. Because of the strong correlation of bladder stones with benign prostatic hyperplasia, laparoscopic cystolithotomy performed in combination with simple prostatectomy using either traditional laparoscopy or with robotic assistance has also been described as another option [12,13]. In our case, due to the massive size of the stone, laparoscopy would not offer any benefit compared to the open approach as a big incision was needed for the extraction of the stone.

Conclusions

Giant bladder stones are not common today. They can present with symptoms that do not predispose them to such a rare entity. Treatment modality for each patient differs with respect to the size of the stone and feasibility of the surgery. Usually, open cystolithotomy is the most effective treatment. In the current era of endourology and minimal invasive surgery, open cystolithotomy still has a place in the urological armamentarium.
  11 in total

1.  Vesical stone: The clinical features of 652 cases.

Authors:  J M Smith; J D O'Flynn
Journal:  Ir Med J       Date:  1975-02-22

2.  Total vaginal prolapse with multiple vesical calculi after hysterectomy.

Authors:  A M Nieder; T Y Chun; V W Nitti
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 3.  The vesical calculus.

Authors:  B F Schwartz; M L Stoller
Journal:  Urol Clin North Am       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 2.241

4.  Robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP): does it make sense?

Authors:  Deliu V Matei; Antonio Brescia; Federica Mazzoleni; Matteo Spinelli; Gennaro Musi; Sara Melegari; Giacomo Galasso; Serena Detti; Ottavio de Cobelli
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2012-05-18       Impact factor: 5.588

Review 5.  Epidemiology of nephrolithiasis.

Authors:  A Ramello; C Vitale; M Marangella
Journal:  J Nephrol       Date:  2000 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.902

6.  Epidemiology of urolithiasis: an update.

Authors:  Alberto Trinchieri
Journal:  Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab       Date:  2008-05

7.  Bladder calculi: did the clinical picture change?

Authors:  F T Hammad; M Kaya; E Kazim
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic and Laparoscopic Simple Prostatectomy: A European-American Multi-institutional Analysis.

Authors:  Riccardo Autorino; Homayoun Zargar; Mirandolino B Mariano; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; René J Sotelo; Piotr L Chlosta; Octavio Castillo; Deliu V Matei; Antonio Celia; Gokhan Koc; Anup Vora; Monish Aron; J Kellogg Parsons; Giovannalberto Pini; James C Jensen; Douglas Sutherland; Xavier Cathelineau; Luciano A Nuñez Bragayrac; Ioannis M Varkarakis; Daniele Amparore; Matteo Ferro; Gaetano Gallo; Alessandro Volpe; Hakan Vuruskan; Gaurav Bandi; Jonathan Hwang; Josh Nething; Nic Muruve; Sameer Chopra; Nishant D Patel; Ithaar Derweesh; David Champ Weeks; Ryan Spier; Keith Kowalczyk; John Lynch; Andrew Harbin; Mohan Verghese; Srinivas Samavedi; Wilson R Molina; Emanuel Dias; Youness Ahallal; Humberto Laydner; Edward Cherullo; Ottavio De Cobelli; David D Thiel; Mikael Lagerkvist; Georges-Pascal Haber; Jihad Kaouk; Fernando J Kim; Estevao Lima; Vipul Patel; Wesley White; Alexander Mottrie; Francesco Porpiglia
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2014-12-04       Impact factor: 20.096

9.  Treatment of Bladder Stones in Adults and Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis on Behalf of the European Association of Urology Urolithiasis Guideline Panel.

Authors:  James F Donaldson; Yasir Ruhayel; Andreas Skolarikos; Steven MacLennan; Yuhong Yuan; Robert Shepherd; Kay Thomas; Christian Seitz; Aleš Petrik; Christian Türk; Andreas Neisius
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2019-07-13       Impact factor: 20.096

10.  Massive vesical calculi formation as a complication of augmentation cystoplasty.

Authors:  Santosh Kumar; Kumar Jayant
Journal:  Nephrourol Mon       Date:  2014-11-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.