Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Urology 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research article

Developing a preoperative predictive model for ureteral length for ureteral stent insertion

Authors: Takashi Kawahara, Kentaro Sakamaki, Hiroki Ito, Shinnosuke Kuroda, Hideyuki Terao, Kazuhide Makiyama, Hiroji Uemura, Masahiro Yao, Hiroshi Miyamoto, Junichi Matsuzaki

Published in: BMC Urology | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Ureteral stenting has been a fundamental part of various urological procedures. Selecting a ureteral stent of optimal length is important for decreasing the incidence of stent migration and complications. The aim of the present study was to develop and internally validate a model for predicting the ureteral length for ureteral stent insertion.

Methods

This study included a total of 127 patients whose ureters had previously been assessed by both intravenous urography (IVU) and CT scan. The actual ureteral length was determined by direct measurement using a 5-Fr ureteral catheter. Multiple linear regression analysis with backward selection was used to model the relationship between the factors analyzed and actual ureteral length. Bootstrapping was used to internally validate the predictive model.

Results

Patients all of whom had stone disease included 76 men (59.8%) and 51 women (40.2%), with the median and mean (± SD) ages of 60 and 58.7 (±14.2) years. In these patients, 53 (41.7%) right and 74 (58.3%) left ureters were analyzed. The median and mean (± SD) actual ureteral lengths were 24.0 and 23.3 (±2.0) cm, respectively. Using the bootstrap methods for internal validation, the correlation coefficient (R2) was 0.57 ± 0.07.

Conclusion

We have developed a predictive model, for the first time, which predicts ureteral length using the following five preoperative characteristics: age, side, sex, IVU measurement, and CT calculation. This predictive model can be used to reliably predict ureteral length based on clinical and radiological factors and may thus be a useful tool to help determining the optimal length of ureteral stent.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Zimskind PD, Fetter TR, Wilkerson JL. Clinical use of long-term indwelling silicone rubber ureteral splints inserted cystoscopically. J Urol. 1967;97(5):840–4.PubMed Zimskind PD, Fetter TR, Wilkerson JL. Clinical use of long-term indwelling silicone rubber ureteral splints inserted cystoscopically. J Urol. 1967;97(5):840–4.PubMed
2.
go back to reference Borboroglu PG, Kane CJ. Current management of severely encrusted ureteral stents with a large associated stone burden. J Urol. 2000;164(3 Pt 1):648–50.CrossRefPubMed Borboroglu PG, Kane CJ. Current management of severely encrusted ureteral stents with a large associated stone burden. J Urol. 2000;164(3 Pt 1):648–50.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Ho CH, Huang KH, Chen SC, Pu YS, Liu SP, Yu HJ. Choosing the ideal length of a double-pigtail ureteral stent according to body height: study based on a Chinese population. Urol Int. 2009;83(1):70–4. doi:10.1159/000224872.CrossRefPubMed Ho CH, Huang KH, Chen SC, Pu YS, Liu SP, Yu HJ. Choosing the ideal length of a double-pigtail ureteral stent according to body height: study based on a Chinese population. Urol Int. 2009;83(1):70–4. doi:10.​1159/​000224872.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Pollard SG, Macfarlane R. Symptoms arising from Double-J ureteral stents. J Urol. 1988;139(1):37–8.PubMed Pollard SG, Macfarlane R. Symptoms arising from Double-J ureteral stents. J Urol. 1988;139(1):37–8.PubMed
6.
9.
go back to reference Kawahara T, Ito H, Terao H, Yamashita Y, Tanaka K, Ogawa T, Uemura H, Kubota Y, Matsuzaki J. Ureteral stent exchange under fluoroscopic guidance using the crochet hook technique in women. Urol Int. 2012;88(3):322–5. doi:10.1159/000336870.CrossRefPubMed Kawahara T, Ito H, Terao H, Yamashita Y, Tanaka K, Ogawa T, Uemura H, Kubota Y, Matsuzaki J. Ureteral stent exchange under fluoroscopic guidance using the crochet hook technique in women. Urol Int. 2012;88(3):322–5. doi:10.​1159/​000336870.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Slaton JW, Kropp KA. Proximal ureteral stent migration: an avoidable complication? J Urol. 1996;155(1):58–61.CrossRefPubMed Slaton JW, Kropp KA. Proximal ureteral stent migration: an avoidable complication? J Urol. 1996;155(1):58–61.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Breau RH, Norman RW. Optimal prevention and management of proximal ureteral stent migration and remigration. J Urol. 2001;166(3):890–3.CrossRefPubMed Breau RH, Norman RW. Optimal prevention and management of proximal ureteral stent migration and remigration. J Urol. 2001;166(3):890–3.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Wills MI, Gilbert HW, Chadwick DJ, Harrison SC. Which ureteric stent length? Br J Urol. 1991;68(4):440.CrossRefPubMed Wills MI, Gilbert HW, Chadwick DJ, Harrison SC. Which ureteric stent length? Br J Urol. 1991;68(4):440.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Pocock RD, Stower MJ, Ferro MA, Smith PJ, Gingell JC. Double J stents. A review of 100 patients. Br J Urol. 1986;58(6):629–33.CrossRefPubMed Pocock RD, Stower MJ, Ferro MA, Smith PJ, Gingell JC. Double J stents. A review of 100 patients. Br J Urol. 1986;58(6):629–33.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Chin JL, Denstedt JD. Retrieval of proximally migrated ureteral stents. J Urol. 1992;148(4):1205–6.PubMed Chin JL, Denstedt JD. Retrieval of proximally migrated ureteral stents. J Urol. 1992;148(4):1205–6.PubMed
15.
go back to reference Kawahara T, Ito H, Terao H, Yoshida M, Ogawa T, Uemura H, Kubota Y, Matsuzaki J. Choosing an appropriate length of loop type ureteral stent using direct ureteral length measurement. Urol Int. 2012;88(1):48–53. doi:10.1159/000332431.CrossRefPubMed Kawahara T, Ito H, Terao H, Yoshida M, Ogawa T, Uemura H, Kubota Y, Matsuzaki J. Choosing an appropriate length of loop type ureteral stent using direct ureteral length measurement. Urol Int. 2012;88(1):48–53. doi:10.​1159/​000332431.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Developing a preoperative predictive model for ureteral length for ureteral stent insertion
Authors
Takashi Kawahara
Kentaro Sakamaki
Hiroki Ito
Shinnosuke Kuroda
Hideyuki Terao
Kazuhide Makiyama
Hiroji Uemura
Masahiro Yao
Hiroshi Miyamoto
Junichi Matsuzaki
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Urology / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2490
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-016-0189-8

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

BMC Urology 1/2016 Go to the issue