Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Urolithiasis 4/2018

01-08-2018 | Original Paper

Experience of retaining encrusted ureteral stents: URL by 4.5/6.5F ureteroscope can reduce the possibility of PCNL

Authors: Zhaohui He, Hanqi Lei, Caixia Zhang, Hangtao Wang, Fucai Tang, Guohua Zeng

Published in: Urolithiasis | Issue 4/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to present our experience of retaining encrusted ureteral stents (EUS) and discuss the effectiveness of 4.5/6.5F ureteroscope (URS) in the procedure. The data of patients with EUS in our center from January 2012 to December 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. The inclusion criterion was ureteral stents that required intervention above the ureteral orifice to retain and was proved to be encrusted. Impacted stents would be removed by ureteroscope lithotripsy (URL) via 8/9.8F or 4.5/6.5F URS. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) then be the further step if URL failed. 46 cases of EUS were treated in 36 patients from January 2012 to December 2016 in our institution. All subjects consisted of 18 males and 18 females; the average age was 49.81 ± 16.40 years (range 5–86). The mean time from stent insertion to encrustation was 9.28 ± 17.15 months (range 1–120). URL was performed in 44 cases (95.7%), including 19 cases (41.3%) by 8/9.8F URS and 25 cases (54.4%) by 4.5/6.5F URS due to the conventional URS’s failure to get into ureteral orifice or further part of ureter. Two patients (4.3%) underwent PCNL due to the inseparable circle developed by the intra-renal segment of encrusted stents. None of the patients underwent extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and open surgery. All stents were eventually removed without blood transfusion or ureteral injury, except three cases with post-operative fever. All procedures were performed under one-session anesthesia. URL by 4.5/6.5F ureteroscope might increase the success rate of retaining encrusted ureteral stents remarkably, and then reduce the possibility of PCNL effectively.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Shandera KC (1997) Minimally invasive management of the calcified ureteral stent. Tech Urol 3(1):54–57PubMed Shandera KC (1997) Minimally invasive management of the calcified ureteral stent. Tech Urol 3(1):54–57PubMed
2.
go back to reference Bhansali M, Patankar S, Dobhada S (2006) Laparoscopic management of a retained heavily encrusted ureteral stent. Int J Urol 13(8):1141–1143CrossRefPubMed Bhansali M, Patankar S, Dobhada S (2006) Laparoscopic management of a retained heavily encrusted ureteral stent. Int J Urol 13(8):1141–1143CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Ahallal Y, Khallouk A, El Fassi MJ, Farih MH (2010) Risk factor analysis and management of ureteral double-j stent complications. Rev Urol 12(2–3):e147–e151PubMedPubMedCentral Ahallal Y, Khallouk A, El Fassi MJ, Farih MH (2010) Risk factor analysis and management of ureteral double-j stent complications. Rev Urol 12(2–3):e147–e151PubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Kelkar V, Patil D (2012) Management of forgotten double J stent and severe multiple large encrusted stones in the bladder and renal pelvis. Cent European J Urol 65(4):238CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kelkar V, Patil D (2012) Management of forgotten double J stent and severe multiple large encrusted stones in the bladder and renal pelvis. Cent European J Urol 65(4):238CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
go back to reference Vanderbrink BA, Rastinehad AR, Ost MC, Smith AD (2008) Encrusted urinary stents: evaluation and endourologic management. J Endourol 22(5):905–912CrossRefPubMed Vanderbrink BA, Rastinehad AR, Ost MC, Smith AD (2008) Encrusted urinary stents: evaluation and endourologic management. J Endourol 22(5):905–912CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Aravantinos E, Gravas S, Karatzas AD, Tzortzis V, Melekos M (2006) Forgotten, encrusted ureteral stents: a challenging problem with an endourologic solution. J Endourol 20(12):1045–1049CrossRefPubMed Aravantinos E, Gravas S, Karatzas AD, Tzortzis V, Melekos M (2006) Forgotten, encrusted ureteral stents: a challenging problem with an endourologic solution. J Endourol 20(12):1045–1049CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Alshumrani G (2014) Percutaneous antegrade removal of encrusted broken double J ureteric stent using a snare. West Indian Med J 63(5):517–520PubMed Alshumrani G (2014) Percutaneous antegrade removal of encrusted broken double J ureteric stent using a snare. West Indian Med J 63(5):517–520PubMed
8.
go back to reference Ivica S, Dragan S (2009) Long-term indwelling double-J stents: bulky kidney and urinary bladder calculosis, spontaneous intraperitoneal perforation of the kidney and peritonitis as a result of “forgotten” double-J stent. Vojnosanit Pregl 66(3):242–244CrossRefPubMed Ivica S, Dragan S (2009) Long-term indwelling double-J stents: bulky kidney and urinary bladder calculosis, spontaneous intraperitoneal perforation of the kidney and peritonitis as a result of “forgotten” double-J stent. Vojnosanit Pregl 66(3):242–244CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Bultitude MF, Tiptaft RC, Glass JM, Dasgupta P (2003) Management of encrusted ureteral stents impacted in upper tract. Urology 62(4):622–626CrossRefPubMed Bultitude MF, Tiptaft RC, Glass JM, Dasgupta P (2003) Management of encrusted ureteral stents impacted in upper tract. Urology 62(4):622–626CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Kehinde EO, Al-Awadi KA, Tawheed A, Al-Hunayan A, Ali Y, Mahmoud AH (2001) Factors affecting the fate of prolonged forgotten ‘J’ stents. Scand J Urol Nephrol 35(3):222–227CrossRefPubMed Kehinde EO, Al-Awadi KA, Tawheed A, Al-Hunayan A, Ali Y, Mahmoud AH (2001) Factors affecting the fate of prolonged forgotten ‘J’ stents. Scand J Urol Nephrol 35(3):222–227CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Lam JS, Gupta M (2002) Tips and tricks for the management of retained ureteral stents. J Endourol 16(10):733–741CrossRefPubMed Lam JS, Gupta M (2002) Tips and tricks for the management of retained ureteral stents. J Endourol 16(10):733–741CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Tsai CC, Shen JT, Huang SP et al (2009) Use of a holmium laser to treat a forgotten double-J stent with whole stent encrustations: a case report. Med Sci 25(10):567–571 Tsai CC, Shen JT, Huang SP et al (2009) Use of a holmium laser to treat a forgotten double-J stent with whole stent encrustations: a case report. Med Sci 25(10):567–571
13.
go back to reference Kehinde EO, Al-Awadi KA, Tawheed A et al (2001) Factors affecting the fate of prolonged forgotten ‘J’ stents. Scand J Urol Nephrol 35:222CrossRefPubMed Kehinde EO, Al-Awadi KA, Tawheed A et al (2001) Factors affecting the fate of prolonged forgotten ‘J’ stents. Scand J Urol Nephrol 35:222CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Santin M, Motta A, Denyer SP et al (1999) Effect of the urine conditioning film on ureteral stent encrustation and characterization of its protein composition. Biomaterials 20:1245–1251CrossRefPubMed Santin M, Motta A, Denyer SP et al (1999) Effect of the urine conditioning film on ureteral stent encrustation and characterization of its protein composition. Biomaterials 20:1245–1251CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Pais VM Jr, Chew B, Shaw O et al (2014) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for removal of encrusted ureteral stents: a multicenter study. J Endourol 28(10):1188–1191CrossRefPubMed Pais VM Jr, Chew B, Shaw O et al (2014) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for removal of encrusted ureteral stents: a multicenter study. J Endourol 28(10):1188–1191CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Teichman JM, Lackner JE, Leveillee RJ, Hulbert JC (1997) Total endoscopic management of the encrusted ureteral stent under a single anaesthesia. Can J Urol 4(4):456–459PubMed Teichman JM, Lackner JE, Leveillee RJ, Hulbert JC (1997) Total endoscopic management of the encrusted ureteral stent under a single anaesthesia. Can J Urol 4(4):456–459PubMed
17.
go back to reference Söylemez H, Yıldırım K, Utangac MM, Aydoğan TB, Ezer M, Atar M (2016) A new alternative for difficult ureter in adult patients: no need to dilate ureter via a balloon or a stent with the aid of 4.5F semirigid ureteroscope. J Endourol 30(6):650–654CrossRefPubMed Söylemez H, Yıldırım K, Utangac MM, Aydoğan TB, Ezer M, Atar M (2016) A new alternative for difficult ureter in adult patients: no need to dilate ureter via a balloon or a stent with the aid of 4.5F semirigid ureteroscope. J Endourol 30(6):650–654CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Geavlete P, Georgescu D, Nita G, Mirciulescu V, Cauni V (2006) Complications of 2735 retrograde semirigid ureteroscopy procedures: a single-center experience. J Endourol Endourol Soc 20(3):179–185CrossRef Geavlete P, Georgescu D, Nita G, Mirciulescu V, Cauni V (2006) Complications of 2735 retrograde semirigid ureteroscopy procedures: a single-center experience. J Endourol Endourol Soc 20(3):179–185CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Kocaoglu C, Ozkan KU (2014) The effectiveness of 4.5F ultrathin semirigid ureteroscope in the management of ureteral stones in prepubertal children: is there a need for any ureteral dilatation? Urology 84(1):202–205CrossRefPubMed Kocaoglu C, Ozkan KU (2014) The effectiveness of 4.5F ultrathin semirigid ureteroscope in the management of ureteral stones in prepubertal children: is there a need for any ureteral dilatation? Urology 84(1):202–205CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Atar M, Sancaktutar AA, Penbegul N et al (2012) Comparison of a 4.5 F semi-rigid ureteroscope with a 7.5 Frigid ureteroscope in the treatment of ureteral stones in preschool-age children. Urol Res 40(6):733–738CrossRefPubMed Atar M, Sancaktutar AA, Penbegul N et al (2012) Comparison of a 4.5 F semi-rigid ureteroscope with a 7.5 Frigid ureteroscope in the treatment of ureteral stones in preschool-age children. Urol Res 40(6):733–738CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Atis G, Arikan O, Gurbuz C et al (2013) Comparison of different ureteroscope sizes in treating ureteral calculi in adult patients. Urology 82(6):1231–1235CrossRefPubMed Atis G, Arikan O, Gurbuz C et al (2013) Comparison of different ureteroscope sizes in treating ureteral calculi in adult patients. Urology 82(6):1231–1235CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Michel MS, Trojan L, Rassweiler JJ (2007) Complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 51(4):899–906CrossRefPubMed Michel MS, Trojan L, Rassweiler JJ (2007) Complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 51(4):899–906CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Segura JW, Patterson DE, LeRoy AJ et al (1985) Percutaneous removal of kidney stones: review of 1,000 cases. J Urol 134:1077–1081CrossRefPubMed Segura JW, Patterson DE, LeRoy AJ et al (1985) Percutaneous removal of kidney stones: review of 1,000 cases. J Urol 134:1077–1081CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Acosta-Miranda AM, Milner J, Turk TM (2009) The FECal Double-J: a simplified approach in the management of encrusted and retained ureteral stents. J Endourol 23(3):409–415CrossRefPubMed Acosta-Miranda AM, Milner J, Turk TM (2009) The FECal Double-J: a simplified approach in the management of encrusted and retained ureteral stents. J Endourol 23(3):409–415CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Zeng G, Wan S, Zhao Z et al (2016) Super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SMP): a new concept in technique and instrumentation. BJU Int 117(4):655–661CrossRefPubMed Zeng G, Wan S, Zhao Z et al (2016) Super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SMP): a new concept in technique and instrumentation. BJU Int 117(4):655–661CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Experience of retaining encrusted ureteral stents: URL by 4.5/6.5F ureteroscope can reduce the possibility of PCNL
Authors
Zhaohui He
Hanqi Lei
Caixia Zhang
Hangtao Wang
Fucai Tang
Guohua Zeng
Publication date
01-08-2018
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Urolithiasis / Issue 4/2018
Print ISSN: 2194-7228
Electronic ISSN: 2194-7236
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-017-0990-1

Other articles of this Issue 4/2018

Urolithiasis 4/2018 Go to the issue