RETRACTED: Effect of preoperative ureteral stenting on the surgical outcomes of patients with 1-2 cm renal stones managed by retrograde intrarenal surgery using a ureteral access sheath
https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2023.12102
Accepted: December 2, 2023
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Objective: To assess the surgical results of patients who underwent retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) using a ureteral access sheath (UAS) for management of renal stones sized 1-2 cm compared between patients who did and did not undergo preoperative ureteral stenting. Materials and methods: This prospective study included 83 patients (aged ≥ 20 years) who underwent RIRS from July 2021 to January 2023. All patients had renal calculi (stone size: 1-2 cm) located within the pelvicalyceal system. 43 and 40 patients were allocated to the non-prestent (group A) and prestent (group B), respectively. Patient baseline characteristics, renal stone details, operative data, stone-free rate (SFR) at 4 weeks and 6 months, and perioperative complications were compared between groups. Results: The baseline characteristics of all patients were comparable across the groups. Four weeks after surgery, the overall stone-free rate (SFR) stood at 62.65%. In the non-prestent and prestent groups, the SFRs were 58.12% and 67.5%, respectively (p = 0.89). By the sixth month post-surgery, the overall SFR rose to 80.72%. In the non-prestent and prestent groups, the SFRs were 76.74% and 85%, respectively (p = 0.081). No notable differences emerged in other variables, including perioperative complications, between the two groups. Conclusions: The SFR showed no significant difference between the prestenting and non-prestenting groups at the 4-week and 6-month postoperative marks. Additionally, there were no substantial differences in complications during surgery and recovery between the groups. Notably, the SFR increased from 4 weeks to 6 months without any additional procedures in either group.
De Coninck V, et al. Systematic review of ureteral access sheaths: facts and myths. BJU Int. 2018; 122:959-969. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14389
Kaplan AG, et al. Use of ureteral access sheaths in ureteroscopy. Nat Rev Urol. 2016; 13:135-140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2015.271
Basem A. Fathi, Ahmed A. Elgammal, Tamer A. Abouelgreed, et al. The outcomes of flexible ureteroscopy for renal calculi of 2 cm or more with and without the use of ureteral access sheath: A retrospective study. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2023; 95:1 https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2023.11524 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2023.11524
Lumma PP, et al. Impact of ureteral stenting prior to ureterorenoscopy on stone-free rates and complications, World J Urol. 2013; 31:855-859. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-011-0789-6
Yuk HD, et al. The effect of preoperative ureteral stenting in retrograde Intrarenal surgery: a multicenter, propensity score-matched study. BMC Urol. 2020; 20:147. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-020-00715-1
Traxer O, Thomas A. Prospective evaluation and classification of ureteral wall injuries resulting from insertion of a ureteral access sheath during retrograde intrarenal surgery. J Urol. 2013; 189:580-584. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.08.197
Pietropaolo A, et al. Endourologic management (PCNL, URS, swl) of stones in solitary kidney: a systematic review from European association of urologist’s young academic urologists and uro-technology groups. J Endourol. 2020; 34:7-17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2019.0455
Chung BI, et al. Ureteroscopic versus percutaneous treatment for medium-size (1-2-cm) renal calculi, J. Endourol. 2008; 22:343-346. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2006.9865
Ghani KR, Wolf JS Jr. What is the stone-free rate following flexible ureteroscopy for kidney stones? Nat Rev Urol. 2015; 12:281-288. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2015.74
Jones P, et al. Outcomes of ureteroscopy (URS) for stone disease in the paediatric population: results of over 100 URS procedures from a UK tertiary centre, World J. Urol. 2020; 38:213-218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02745-3
Netsch C, et al. Impact of preoperative ureteral stenting on stonefree rates of ureteroscopy for nephroureterolithiasis: a matchedpaired analysis of 286 patients, Urology. 2012; 801214-1219. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2012.06.064
Kawahara T, et al. Preoperative stenting for ureteroscopic lithotripsy for a large renal stone. Int J Urol. 2012; 19:881-885. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2042.2012.03046.x
Yang Y, et al. Preoperative double-J stent placement can improve the stone-free rate for patients undergoing ureteroscopic lithotripsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Urolithiasis. 2018; 46:493-499. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-017-1012-z
Assimos D, et al. Preoperative JJ stent placement in ureteric and renal stone treatment: results from the Clinical Research Office of Endourological Society (CROES) ureteroscopy (URS) Global Study. BJU Int. 2016; 117:648-654. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13250
Rubenstein RA, et al. Prestenting improves ureteroscopic stonefree rates, J. Endourol. 2007; 21:1277-1280. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2007.9888
Jones BJ, et al. Use of the double pigtail stent in stone retrieval following unsuccessful ureteroscopy. Br J Urol. 1990; 66:254-256. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.1990.tb14922.x
Molina WR, et al. The S.T.O.N.E. Score: a new assessment tool to predict stone free rates in ureteroscopy from pre-operative radiological features. Int Braz J Urol. 2014; 40:23-29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2014.01.04
Tonyalı S, et al. Prediction of stone-free status after single-session retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stones. Turk J Urol. 2018; 44:473-477. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2018.88615
Rehman J, et al. Characterization of intrapelvic pressure during ureteropyeloscopy with ureteral access sheaths. Urology. 2003; 61:713-718. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-4295(02)02440-8
Tracy CR, et al. Increasing the size of ureteral access sheath during retrograde intrarenal surgery improves surgical efficiency without increasing complications. World J Urol. 2018; 36:971-978. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2204-z
Takazawa R, Kitayama S, Tsujii T, Successful outcome of flexible ureteroscopy with holmium laser lithotripsy for renal stones 2 cm or greater. Int J Urol. 2012; 19:264-267. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2042.2011.02931.x
Rippel CA, et al. Residual fragments following ureteroscopic lithotripsy: incidence and predictors on postoperative computerized tomography. J Urol. 2012; 188:2246-2251. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.08.040
Jackman SV, et al. Plain abdominal x-ray versus computerized tomography screening: sensitivity for stone localization after nonenhanced spiral computerized tomography. J Urol. 2000; 164: 308-310. K. Assantachai et al. Heliyon. 2023; 9:e158017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67346-6
Kanno T, et al. The utility of the kidneys-ureters-bladder radiograph as the sole imaging modality and its combination with ultrasonography for the detection of renal stones, Urology. 2017; 104:40-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2017.03.019
Sung LH, Cho DY, The role of preoperative ureteral stenting in retrograde intrarenal surgery in renal stone patients: a propensity score-matched study. Transl Androl Urol. 2020; 9:276-283. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/tau.2020.03.09
Bai P-D, et al. Effect of preoperative double-J ureteral stenting before flexible ureterorenoscopy on stone-free rates and complications. Current Med Sci. 2021; 41:140-144. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11596-021-2328-z
Copyright (c) 2023 the Author(s)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
PAGEPress has chosen to apply the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all manuscripts to be published.
Downloads
Citations
