Cargando…

Impact of ureteric stent on outcome of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: A propensity score analysis

INTRODUCTION: Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) is one of the most frequently performed procedures in patients with urolithiasis. For ureter-localized stones, SWL is often preceded by a double J stent insertion. However, fear of serious complications, including sepsis associated with stents...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kaczmarek, Krystian, Gołąb, Adam, Słojewski, Marcin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Polish Urological Association 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4986290/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27551556
http://dx.doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2016.680
_version_ 1782448178432311296
author Kaczmarek, Krystian
Gołąb, Adam
Słojewski, Marcin
author_facet Kaczmarek, Krystian
Gołąb, Adam
Słojewski, Marcin
author_sort Kaczmarek, Krystian
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) is one of the most frequently performed procedures in patients with urolithiasis. For ureter-localized stones, SWL is often preceded by a double J stent insertion. However, fear of serious complications, including sepsis associated with stents, is often expressed. The following study assessed the impact of stent insertions on the results of SWL in patients with ureteric stones. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study group consisted of 411 ureteric stone patients who were treated with SWL from January 2010 to December 2014. In 60 cases, treatment was preceded by ureteric stent insertion. A propensity scoring system was used to pair non-stented patients with the stented group. Success rates were assessed and compared using the chi-squared test. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the influence of particular variables on the stone-free rate. RESULTS: The overall success rate was 82.2%. After matching, the success rate of the stented group was not significantly different from the control group (85.0% vs. 83.3% respectively, p = 0.80). The mean number of sessions was higher in the stented group (1.88 per patient). Stones located in the lower part of the ureter have the greatest chance of being successfully treated. CONCLUSIONS: The double J stent has no influence on the outcome of SWL treatment. In view of the greater likelihood of having additional sessions, this approach should be reserved for selected cases.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4986290
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Polish Urological Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49862902016-08-22 Impact of ureteric stent on outcome of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: A propensity score analysis Kaczmarek, Krystian Gołąb, Adam Słojewski, Marcin Cent European J Urol Original Paper INTRODUCTION: Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) is one of the most frequently performed procedures in patients with urolithiasis. For ureter-localized stones, SWL is often preceded by a double J stent insertion. However, fear of serious complications, including sepsis associated with stents, is often expressed. The following study assessed the impact of stent insertions on the results of SWL in patients with ureteric stones. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study group consisted of 411 ureteric stone patients who were treated with SWL from January 2010 to December 2014. In 60 cases, treatment was preceded by ureteric stent insertion. A propensity scoring system was used to pair non-stented patients with the stented group. Success rates were assessed and compared using the chi-squared test. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the influence of particular variables on the stone-free rate. RESULTS: The overall success rate was 82.2%. After matching, the success rate of the stented group was not significantly different from the control group (85.0% vs. 83.3% respectively, p = 0.80). The mean number of sessions was higher in the stented group (1.88 per patient). Stones located in the lower part of the ureter have the greatest chance of being successfully treated. CONCLUSIONS: The double J stent has no influence on the outcome of SWL treatment. In view of the greater likelihood of having additional sessions, this approach should be reserved for selected cases. Polish Urological Association 2016-04-08 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4986290/ /pubmed/27551556 http://dx.doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2016.680 Text en Copyright by Polish Urological Association http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License, allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Kaczmarek, Krystian
Gołąb, Adam
Słojewski, Marcin
Impact of ureteric stent on outcome of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: A propensity score analysis
title Impact of ureteric stent on outcome of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: A propensity score analysis
title_full Impact of ureteric stent on outcome of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: A propensity score analysis
title_fullStr Impact of ureteric stent on outcome of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: A propensity score analysis
title_full_unstemmed Impact of ureteric stent on outcome of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: A propensity score analysis
title_short Impact of ureteric stent on outcome of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: A propensity score analysis
title_sort impact of ureteric stent on outcome of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: a propensity score analysis
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4986290/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27551556
http://dx.doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2016.680
work_keys_str_mv AT kaczmarekkrystian impactofuretericstentonoutcomeofextracorporealshockwavelithotripsyapropensityscoreanalysis
AT gołabadam impactofuretericstentonoutcomeofextracorporealshockwavelithotripsyapropensityscoreanalysis
AT słojewskimarcin impactofuretericstentonoutcomeofextracorporealshockwavelithotripsyapropensityscoreanalysis