Skip to main content
Top
Published in: World Journal of Urology 11/2017

Open Access 01-11-2017 | Original Article

Results of day-case ureterorenoscopy (DC-URS) for stone disease: prospective outcomes over 4.5 years

Authors: Anngona Ghosh, Rachel Oliver, Carolyn Way, Lucy White, Bhaskar K. Somani

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 11/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate the prospective outcomes of day-case ureterorenoscopy (DC-URS) for stone disease. With the rising prevalence of stone disease in the face of finite resources, there is increasing pressure to undertake procedures as a day case avoiding in-patient stay. There are a limited number of studies reporting on the feasibility of ureteroscopy as a day-case procedure. This study aimed to investigate the prospective outcomes and predictors precluding to DC-URS for stone disease in patients treated in our university teaching hospital.

Materials and methods

Between March 2012 and July 2016, consecutive cases of adult stone ureteroscopy performed or supervised by a single surgeon were recorded in a prospective database. Patients underwent pre-operative counselling in a specialist stone clinic and were admitted to a dedicated ‘Surgical day unit’ on the day of surgery. A standardised anaesthetic protocol was adhered to in all cases. Data on patient demographics, stone parameters, pre-operative assessment, operative details, length of stay, stone-free rate and complication rates were collected and analysed.

Results

A total of 544 consecutive adult ureteroscopy for stone disease were conducted over the study period with a day-case rate of 77.7%. Thirty-nine percent of failed day-case ureteroscopy were due to late completion of ureteroscopy and due to associated social circumstances of patients. The mean stone size, operating time duration and post-operative stent insertion rates for DC-URS patients were 14 mm, 46 min and 96.5%, respectively. Post-operatively, the mean stone-free rate (SFR), unplanned re-admissions and complications for DC-URS patients were 95, 4 and 4%, respectively. A higher failure of DC-URS was related to patient’s age (p = 0.003), positive pre-operative urine culture (p < 0.001), elevated pre-operative serum creatinine (p < 0.001) and higher mean operating time (p < 0.02).

Conclusion

Based on our results, a day-case ureteroscopy rate of nearly 78% can be achieved. With its acceptable complication rate, and low re-admission rates, DC-URS is a safe and feasible option in a majority of patients with stone disease.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Rukin NJ, Siddiqui Z, Chedgy E, Somani BK (2016) Trends in upper tract stone disease in England: evidence from the hospital episodes statistics (HES) database. Int Urol. doi:10.1159/000449510 Rukin NJ, Siddiqui Z, Chedgy E, Somani BK (2016) Trends in upper tract stone disease in England: evidence from the hospital episodes statistics (HES) database. Int Urol. doi:10.​1159/​000449510
2.
go back to reference Geraghty R, Jones P, Somani BK (2017) Worldwide trends of urinary stone disease treatment over the last two decades: a systematic review. J Endourol. doi:10.1089/end.2016.0895 Geraghty R, Jones P, Somani BK (2017) Worldwide trends of urinary stone disease treatment over the last two decades: a systematic review. J Endourol. doi:10.​1089/​end.​2016.​0895
3.
go back to reference Geavlete P, Multescu R, Geavlete B (2014) Pushing the boundaries of ureteroscopy: current status and future perspectives. Nat Rev Urol 11(7):373–382CrossRefPubMed Geavlete P, Multescu R, Geavlete B (2014) Pushing the boundaries of ureteroscopy: current status and future perspectives. Nat Rev Urol 11(7):373–382CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Somani BK, Giusti G, Sun Y, Osther PJ, Frank M, De Sio M, Turna B, De la Rosette J (2017) Complications associated with ureteroscopy (URS) related to treatment of urolithiasis: the Clinical Office of Endourological Society URS Global Study. World J Urol 35(4):675–681CrossRefPubMed Somani BK, Giusti G, Sun Y, Osther PJ, Frank M, De Sio M, Turna B, De la Rosette J (2017) Complications associated with ureteroscopy (URS) related to treatment of urolithiasis: the Clinical Office of Endourological Society URS Global Study. World J Urol 35(4):675–681CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Aboumarzouk OM, Somani B, Monga M (2012) Safety and efficacy of ureteroscopic lithotripsy for stone disease in obese patients: a systematic review of the literature. BJU Int 110(8 Pt B):E374–E380CrossRefPubMed Aboumarzouk OM, Somani B, Monga M (2012) Safety and efficacy of ureteroscopic lithotripsy for stone disease in obese patients: a systematic review of the literature. BJU Int 110(8 Pt B):E374–E380CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Laing KA, Lam TB, McClinton S, Cohen NP, Traxer O, Somani BK (2012) Outcomes of ureteroscopy for stone disease in pregnancy: results from a systematic review of the literature. Urol Int 89(4):380–386CrossRefPubMed Laing KA, Lam TB, McClinton S, Cohen NP, Traxer O, Somani BK (2012) Outcomes of ureteroscopy for stone disease in pregnancy: results from a systematic review of the literature. Urol Int 89(4):380–386CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Jones P, Rai BP, Somani BK (2016) Outcomes of ureteroscopy for patients with stones in a solitary kidney: evidence from a systematic review. Cent Eur J Urol 69(1):83–90 Jones P, Rai BP, Somani BK (2016) Outcomes of ureteroscopy for patients with stones in a solitary kidney: evidence from a systematic review. Cent Eur J Urol 69(1):83–90
8.
go back to reference Taylor AL, Oakley N, Das S, Parys BT (2002) Day-case ureteroscopy: an observational study. BJU Int 89(3):181–185CrossRefPubMed Taylor AL, Oakley N, Das S, Parys BT (2002) Day-case ureteroscopy: an observational study. BJU Int 89(3):181–185CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Cheung MC, Lee F, Leung YL et al (2001) Outpatient ureteroscopy: predictive factors for postoperative events. Urology 58(6):914–918CrossRefPubMed Cheung MC, Lee F, Leung YL et al (2001) Outpatient ureteroscopy: predictive factors for postoperative events. Urology 58(6):914–918CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Atis G, Gurbuz C, Arikan O et al (2013) Retrograde intrarenal surgery for the treatment of renal stones in patients with a solitary kidney. Urology 82:290–294CrossRefPubMed Atis G, Gurbuz C, Arikan O et al (2013) Retrograde intrarenal surgery for the treatment of renal stones in patients with a solitary kidney. Urology 82:290–294CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Somani BK, Desai M, Traxer O et al (2014) Stone-free rate (SFR): a new proposal for defining levels of SFR. Urolithiasis 42:95CrossRefPubMed Somani BK, Desai M, Traxer O et al (2014) Stone-free rate (SFR): a new proposal for defining levels of SFR. Urolithiasis 42:95CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Yip K, Lee CW, Tam PC (1998) Holmium laser lithotripsy for ureteral calculi: an outpatient procedure. J Endourol 12(3):241–246CrossRefPubMed Yip K, Lee CW, Tam PC (1998) Holmium laser lithotripsy for ureteral calculi: an outpatient procedure. J Endourol 12(3):241–246CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Aboumarzouk OM, Monga M, Kata SG, Traxer O, Somani BK (2012) Flexible ureteroscopy and lasertripsy for stones >2 cm: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endourol 26(10):1257–1263CrossRefPubMed Aboumarzouk OM, Monga M, Kata SG, Traxer O, Somani BK (2012) Flexible ureteroscopy and lasertripsy for stones >2 cm: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endourol 26(10):1257–1263CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Muslumanoglu AY, Fuglsig S, Frattini A, Labate G, Nadler RB, Martov A, Wong C, de la Rosette JJMCH (2017) Risks and benefits of postoperative double-J stent placement after ureteroscopy: results from the Clinical Research Office of Endourological Society Ureteroscopy Global study. J Endourol 31(5):446–451CrossRefPubMed Muslumanoglu AY, Fuglsig S, Frattini A, Labate G, Nadler RB, Martov A, Wong C, de la Rosette JJMCH (2017) Risks and benefits of postoperative double-J stent placement after ureteroscopy: results from the Clinical Research Office of Endourological Society Ureteroscopy Global study. J Endourol 31(5):446–451CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Hajjar JH, Budd HA, Wachtel Z, Howhannesian A (1998) Ambulatory radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 51(3):443–448CrossRefPubMed Hajjar JH, Budd HA, Wachtel Z, Howhannesian A (1998) Ambulatory radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 51(3):443–448CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Gordon NS (1998) Catheter-free same day surgery transurethral resection of the prostate. Urology 51(3):443–448CrossRef Gordon NS (1998) Catheter-free same day surgery transurethral resection of the prostate. Urology 51(3):443–448CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Baş O, Tuygun C, Dede O et al (2012) Factors affecting complication rates of retrograde flexible ureterorenoscopy: analysis of 1571 procedures—a single center experience. J Endourol 26(10):1257–1263CrossRef Baş O, Tuygun C, Dede O et al (2012) Factors affecting complication rates of retrograde flexible ureterorenoscopy: analysis of 1571 procedures—a single center experience. J Endourol 26(10):1257–1263CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Gunlusoy B, Degirmenci T, Kozacioglu Z et al (2013) Factors affecting the complications of pneumatic lithotripsy for treatment of ureteral stones with different localizations: a multivariate analysis of complications. Urol Int 91(3):357–362CrossRefPubMed Gunlusoy B, Degirmenci T, Kozacioglu Z et al (2013) Factors affecting the complications of pneumatic lithotripsy for treatment of ureteral stones with different localizations: a multivariate analysis of complications. Urol Int 91(3):357–362CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Molina WR, Kin FJ, Spendlove J et al (2014) The STONE score: a new assessment tool to predict stone free rates in ureteroscopy from pre-operative radiological features. Int Braz J Urol 40(1):23–29CrossRefPubMed Molina WR, Kin FJ, Spendlove J et al (2014) The STONE score: a new assessment tool to predict stone free rates in ureteroscopy from pre-operative radiological features. Int Braz J Urol 40(1):23–29CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Skolarikos AA, Papatsoris AG, Mitsogiannis IC et al (2009) Current status of ureteroscopic treatment for urolithiasis. Int J Urol 16(9):713–717CrossRefPubMed Skolarikos AA, Papatsoris AG, Mitsogiannis IC et al (2009) Current status of ureteroscopic treatment for urolithiasis. Int J Urol 16(9):713–717CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Hyams ES, Munver R, Bird VG et al (2010) Flexible ureterorenoscopy and holmium laser lithotripsy for the management of renal stone burdens that measure 2 to 3 cm: a multi-institutional experience. J Endourol 24(10):1583–1588CrossRefPubMed Hyams ES, Munver R, Bird VG et al (2010) Flexible ureterorenoscopy and holmium laser lithotripsy for the management of renal stone burdens that measure 2 to 3 cm: a multi-institutional experience. J Endourol 24(10):1583–1588CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Atis G, Gurbuz C, Arikan O et al (2016) Ureteroscopic management with laser lithotripsy of renal pelvic stones. World J Urol 34(8):1169–1173CrossRef Atis G, Gurbuz C, Arikan O et al (2016) Ureteroscopic management with laser lithotripsy of renal pelvic stones. World J Urol 34(8):1169–1173CrossRef
25.
go back to reference El-Nahas AR, Ibrahim HM, Youssef RF et al (2012) Flexible ureterorenoscopy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of lower pole stones of 10–20 mm. BJU Int 110(6):898–902CrossRefPubMed El-Nahas AR, Ibrahim HM, Youssef RF et al (2012) Flexible ureterorenoscopy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of lower pole stones of 10–20 mm. BJU Int 110(6):898–902CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Tan HJ, Strope SA, He C et al (2011) Immediate unplanned hospital admission after outpatient ureteroscopy for stone disease. J Urol 185(6):2181–2185CrossRefPubMed Tan HJ, Strope SA, He C et al (2011) Immediate unplanned hospital admission after outpatient ureteroscopy for stone disease. J Urol 185(6):2181–2185CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Perlmutter AE, Talug C, Tarry WF et al (2008) Impact of stone location on success rates of endoscopic lithotripsy for nephrolithiasis. Urology 71(2):214–217CrossRefPubMed Perlmutter AE, Talug C, Tarry WF et al (2008) Impact of stone location on success rates of endoscopic lithotripsy for nephrolithiasis. Urology 71(2):214–217CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Traxer O, Wendt-Nordahl G, Sodha H et al (2015) Differences in renal stone treatment and outcomes for patients treated either with or without the support of a ureteral access sheath: the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society Ureteroscopy Global Study. World J Urol 33(12):2137–2144CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Traxer O, Wendt-Nordahl G, Sodha H et al (2015) Differences in renal stone treatment and outcomes for patients treated either with or without the support of a ureteral access sheath: the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society Ureteroscopy Global Study. World J Urol 33(12):2137–2144CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Results of day-case ureterorenoscopy (DC-URS) for stone disease: prospective outcomes over 4.5 years
Authors
Anngona Ghosh
Rachel Oliver
Carolyn Way
Lucy White
Bhaskar K. Somani
Publication date
01-11-2017
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
World Journal of Urology / Issue 11/2017
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2061-1

Other articles of this Issue 11/2017

World Journal of Urology 11/2017 Go to the issue