Efficacy of semirigid ureterorenoscopy with the use of ureteral acsess sheath in the treatment of impacted ureteral stones: A prospective randomized study

Efficacy of semirigid ureterorenoscopy with the use of ureteral acsess sheath in the treatment of impacted ureteral stones: A prospective randomized study

Aim: To investigate the advantages of using Ureteral Access Sheat (UAS) with semirigid ureterorenoscopy in patients with impactedureteral stones.Materials and Methods: One hundred and 22 adult patients that presented to our clinic with the complaint of impacted stones in themiddle and upper parts of the ureter and were scheduled for surgical treatment. The procedure was performed without UAS in controlgroup and using UAS in study group.Results: No significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of age, gender, stone disease history, presentationcomplaint, stone side, size, density and localization, degree of renal hydronephrosis, complications and length of hospital stay. Stonemigration, operation time, duration of fluoroscopy, and postoperative additional surgical intervention rates were significantly lowerin the UAS group [26.2% (n = 16) vs 11.5% (n = 7), p = 0.037; 35.46 ± 5.3 min vs 25.56 ± 4.2 min, p < 0.001, 5.50 ± 0.86 sec vs 3.24 ±0.69 sec, p < 0.001; and 19.7% (n = 12) vs 6.6% (n = 4), p = 0.032, respectively]. The operation was successful in 48 (78.7%) patientsin the control group and 57 (93.4%) in the UAS group, with a statistically significant difference (p = 0.019).Conclusion: The use of UAS in the treatment of middle-upper impacted ureteral stones presents as an advantageous method due tothe shorter operation time and lower rates of intraoperative stone migration and high success rates of the operation.

___

  • 1. Preminger GM, Tiselius HG, Assimos DG, et al. 2007 guideline for the management of ureteral calculi. J Urol 2007;178:2418-34.
  • 2. Morgentaler A, Bridge SS, Dretler SP. Management of the impacted ureteral calculus. J Urol 1990;143:263- 6.
  • 3. Ather MH, Paryani J, Memon A, et al. A 10-year experience of managing ureteric calculi, changing trends towards endourological intervention -is there a role for open surgery? BJU Int 2001;88:173.
  • 4. Türk C, Neisius A, Petrik A, et al. Guidelines on Urolithiasis. Eur Assoc Urol 2018;1-84.
  • 5. Auge BK ,Piletrow PK, Lallas CD, et al. Ureteral acsess sheath provides protection against elevated renal pressures during routine flexible ureteroscopic stone manipulation. J Endourol 2004;18:33-6.
  • 6. Rehman J, Monga M, Landman J, et al.Charactrezation of intrapelvic pressure during ureteropylepyeloscopy with ureteral access sheath. Urology 2003;61:713-8.
  • 7. Segura JW, Preminger GM, Assimos DG, et al. Ureteral Stones Clinical Guidelines Panel summary report on the management of ureteral calculi. The American Urological Association. J Urol 1997;158:1915-21.
  • 8. Cui Y, Cao W, Shen H, et al. Comparison of ESWL and ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy in management of ureteral stones. PLoS One 2014;9:87634.
  • 9. Drach GW, Dretler S, Fair W, et al. Report of the United States Cooperative Study of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy. J Urol 1986;135:1127-33.
  • 10. Yencilek F, Sarica K, Gurpinar T, et al. A comparison of shock wave lithotripsy, semirigid and flexible ureteroscopy in the management of proximal ureteral calculi. Turk J Urol 2009;35:101-7.
  • 11. Gucuk A, Burgu B, Tuygun C. The effectiveness of antegrade percutaneous approach on impacted proximal ureteral stones. Turk J Urol 2010;36:132.
  • 12. Pardalidis NP, Papatsoris AG, Kapotis CG, et al. Treatment of impacted lower third ureteral stones with the use of the ureteral access sheath. Urol Res 2006;34:211-4.
  • 13. Elganainy E, Hameed DA, Elgammal M, et al. Experience with impacted upper ureteral stones; should we abandon using semirigid ureteroscopes and pneumatic lithoclast? Int Arch Med 2009;2:13.
  • 14. Sener TE, Cloutier J, Villa L, et al. Can We Provide Low Intrarenal Pressures with Good Irrigation Flow by Decreasing the Size of Ureteral Access Sheaths. J Endourol 2016;30:49-55.
  • 15. Rehman J, Monga M, Landman J, et al. Characterization of intrapelvic pressure during ureteropyeloscopy with ureteral access sheaths. Urology 2003;61:713-8.
  • 16. Kourambas J, Byrne RR, Preminger GM. Does a ureteral access sheath facilitate ureteroscopy? J Urol 2001;165:789-93.
  • 17. Traxer O, Wendt-Nordahl G, Sodha H, et al. 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 2015;33:2137-44.
  • 18. 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;189:580-4.
Annals of Medical Research-Cover
  • Yayın Aralığı: Aylık
  • Yayıncı: İnönü Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

Clinical and functional results of patients after arthroscopic single row rotator cuff repair and arthroscopic acromioplasty

Duran TOPAK, Burak KUŞCU, Fatih DOĞAR, Bilal ÖKKEŞ, Ahmet TEMİZ, Fatih VATANSEVER

Which method for the laparoscopic repair of inguinal hernia?; TAPP versus TEP

Remzi AKTÜRK, Serdar SERİNSÖZ

Knowledge, behaviors and opinions of medical faculty students during the COVID-19 pandemic

Enis ÖZKAYA, Şebnem ALANYA TOSUN, Kaan NOMER, Sıla ALEMDAROĞLU

Evaluation of the relationship between MAOA-uVNTR gene polymorphism and impulsivity, anger, temperament and personality traits in healthy male subjects

Nesrin DİLBAZ, Hasan KAYA, Aybeniz CİVAN KAHVE, Özlem BOLAT KAYA

Comparison of diagnostic scoring systems with imaging methods for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis

Sabri ÖZDEN, Saadettin ER, Birkan BİRBEN, Bedriye Müge SÖNMEZ, Murat Tuğra KÖSA, Mesut TEZ

Evaluation of socio-demographic characteristics of people was determined to use synthetic cannabinoids in Malatya and its surrounding cities / districts and LC-MS/MS analysis method

Mücahit ORUÇ, Osman CELBİŞ, Bedirhan Sezer ÖNER, Semih PETEKKAYA, Özcan SOYLU, Ahmet Hakan DİNÇ

Comparison of Computerized Tomographic Angiography (CTA) and Digital Subtraction Angiography (DSA) in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage: A retrospective analysis

Dursun TÜRKÖZ, Tamer TAMDOĞAN

Endovascular treatment of ruptured anterior circulation aneurysms within 24 hours: Clinical and angiographic results

Mehmet KOLU, İsmail Okan YILDIRIM, Kaya SARAÇ, Gulyara ÇİĞDEM, Osman DERE, Veysel KAYA

The factors affecting the duration of hospitalization in pulmonary embolism

Osman BEKTAŞ, Zübeyir CEBECİ, Seçkin DERELİ

Stigma in head and neck tuberculosis patients: Evaluation and analysis

İsmail AYTAÇ