TY - JOUR

T1 - Safety and effectiveness of magnetic ureteric stent removal under ultrasound control

T2 - a randomized single center trial

AU - Li, Jingqiu

AU - Gauhar, Vineet

AU - Lim, Ee Jean

AU - Dmitriy, Shkarupa

AU - Vladimir, Obidnyak

AU - Dmitriy, Gorelov

AU - Igor, Semeniakin

AU - Gadzhiev, Nariman

N1 - © 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

PY - 2023/11

Y1 - 2023/11

N2 - PURPOSE: To assess the safety and effectiveness of magnetic ureteric stent removal with a special magnet retriever under ultrasound guidance.METHODS: A total of 60 male patients, who underwent ureteroscopy from October 2020 to March 2022, were prospectively enrolled and randomized into two groups. Group A patients underwent conventional double-J (DJ) stent insertion and subsequent stent removal via flexible cystoscopy. Group B patients underwent stent insertion using magnetic ureteric stent [Blackstar, Urotech (Achenmühle, Germany)] and stents were removed using a special magnet retriever under ultrasound guidance. Stents were left in situ for 30 days in both groups. All patients had follow-ups with a ureter stent symptoms questionnaire at 3- and 30-days post stent insertion. Visual analog scale (VAS) was assessed immediately after stent removal.RESULTS: Stent removal time (142.5 s vs 142.5 s, group A vs group B, p < 0.0001) and VAS scores (4 vs 1, group A vs group B, p = 0.0008) were significantly lower in Group B. There were no statistically significant differences between both groups in the "urinary symptoms" (p = 0.3471) and "sexual matters" (p = 0.6126) in the USSQ domains. There was marginal statistical significance favoring Group A in the "body pain" (p = 0.0303), "general health score" (p = 0.0072), "additional problems" (p = 0.0142), and "work performance" (p < 0.0001) domains.CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic ureteric stent can be considered as a safe and efficient alternative to conventional DJ stent. This approach avoids the need for cystoscopy, saving resources while minimizing patient discomfort.

AB - PURPOSE: To assess the safety and effectiveness of magnetic ureteric stent removal with a special magnet retriever under ultrasound guidance.METHODS: A total of 60 male patients, who underwent ureteroscopy from October 2020 to March 2022, were prospectively enrolled and randomized into two groups. Group A patients underwent conventional double-J (DJ) stent insertion and subsequent stent removal via flexible cystoscopy. Group B patients underwent stent insertion using magnetic ureteric stent [Blackstar, Urotech (Achenmühle, Germany)] and stents were removed using a special magnet retriever under ultrasound guidance. Stents were left in situ for 30 days in both groups. All patients had follow-ups with a ureter stent symptoms questionnaire at 3- and 30-days post stent insertion. Visual analog scale (VAS) was assessed immediately after stent removal.RESULTS: Stent removal time (142.5 s vs 142.5 s, group A vs group B, p < 0.0001) and VAS scores (4 vs 1, group A vs group B, p = 0.0008) were significantly lower in Group B. There were no statistically significant differences between both groups in the "urinary symptoms" (p = 0.3471) and "sexual matters" (p = 0.6126) in the USSQ domains. There was marginal statistical significance favoring Group A in the "body pain" (p = 0.0303), "general health score" (p = 0.0072), "additional problems" (p = 0.0142), and "work performance" (p < 0.0001) domains.CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic ureteric stent can be considered as a safe and efficient alternative to conventional DJ stent. This approach avoids the need for cystoscopy, saving resources while minimizing patient discomfort.

KW - Humans

KW - Male

KW - Ureter/surgery

KW - Ureteroscopy

KW - Pain/etiology

KW - Stents

KW - Magnetic Phenomena

U2 - 10.1007/s00345-023-04437-5

DO - 10.1007/s00345-023-04437-5

M3 - Article

C2 - 37243718

VL - 41

SP - 2889

EP - 2896

JO - World Journal of Urology

JF - World Journal of Urology

SN - 0724-4983

IS - 11

ER -