Comparison of Two Different Scoring Systems in Encrusted Ureteral Stent Management: A Single-Center Experience

被引:11
作者
Guner, Ekrem [1 ]
Seker, Kamil Gokhan [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hlth Sci, Bakirkoy Dr Sadi Konuk Training & Res Hosp, Dept Urol, Tevfik Saglam Caddesi 11, TR-34147 Istanbul, Turkey
关键词
ureteral stent; encrusted; calcified; score; KUB; FECal; INDWELLING TIME; KIDNEY; KUB;
D O I
10.22037/uj.v0i0.5516
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Purpose: To report our single-center experience in encrusted ureteral stent management and to compare the utility of two different scoring systems, KUB (Kidney, Ureter, Bladder) versus FECal (forgotten, encrusted, calcified), in patient management. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of all patients who were found to have encrusted/retained ureteral stent and underwent various procedures to remove encrusted ureteral stent in our clinic between May 2014 and December 2018. Encrusted stent grading was performed using KUB and FECal grading systems. KUB system score is the sum of the stone burden scores of 3 different parts of an encrusted stent within the kidney, ureter and bladder determined using a scale from 1 to 5 according to the maximal diameter of encrustation. FECal grading system is based on the stone size, location and degree of stent encrustation and scored from Grade 1 to Grade 5. Results: A total of 39 patients (29 males and 10 females) were included the study. The mean age of the patients was 46.4 +/- 14.5 years, ranging from 13 to 71 years. The mean time from ureteral stent insertion to encrustation was 13.7 +/- 26.4 months, varying between 2 and 120 months. The mean KUB score was 6.4 +/- 2.4. According to FECal system, 53.8% of the patients were classified as Grade 1 and 15.4% as Grade 2. The encrusted ureteral stents of eight patients (20.5%) could be removed with the aid of a foreign body forceps inserted through a cystoscope. Fourteen patients (35.9%) underwent cystolithotripsy, seven (17.9%) underwent flexible ureterorenoscopy (URS), six (15.4%) underwent rigid URS, and three (7.7%) underwent combined percutaneous nephrolithotomy and URS beside stent removal. In multivariate regression analysis, largest encrustation diameter, FECal system grade and KUB score were found to be significant predictors of stone- and stent-free status (p < 0.001 for all). Also, KUB score was found to be associated with the number of required procedures (r= .506, p = .001). Conclusion: KUB encrusted stent scoring system might be useful in predicting the number of required procedures to achieve stone- and stent-free status. Pure intracorporeal endourologic procedures, percutaneous interventions or open surgery might be preferred according to the patient's situation and the surgeon's experience and preference.
引用
收藏
页码:248 / 251
页数:4
相关论文
共 16 条
  • [1] The FECal Double-J: A Simplified Approach in the Management of Encrusted and Retained Ureteral Stents
    Acosta-Miranda, Alex M.
    Milner, John
    Turk, Thomas M. T.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2009, 23 (03) : 409 - 415
  • [2] Challenges in treatment and diagnosis of forgotten/encrusted double-J ureteral stents: the largest single-center experience
    Adanur, Senol
    Ozkaya, Fatih
    [J]. RENAL FAILURE, 2016, 38 (06) : 920 - 926
  • [3] Kidney, Ureter, and Bladder (KUB): A Novel Grading System for Encrusted Ureteral Stents
    Arenas, Javier L.
    Shen, Jim K.
    Keheila, Mohamed
    Abourbih, Samuel R.
    Lee, Albert
    Stokes, Philip K.
    Li, Roger
    Alsyouf, Muhannad
    Lightfoot, Michelle A.
    Baldwin, D. Duane
    [J]. UROLOGY, 2016, 97 : 51 - 55
  • [4] Single session removal of forgotten encrusted ureteral stents: combined endourological approach
    Bostanci, Yakup
    Ozden, Ender
    Atac, Fatih
    Yakupoglu, Yarkin Kamil
    Yilmaz, Ali Faik
    Sarikaya, Saban
    [J]. UROLOGICAL RESEARCH, 2012, 40 (05): : 523 - 529
  • [5] Management of encrusted ureteral stents impacted in upper tract
    Bultitude, MF
    Tiptaft, RC
    Glass, JM
    Dasgupta, P
    [J]. UROLOGY, 2003, 62 (04) : 622 - 626
  • [6] POLYURETHANE INTERNAL URETERAL STENTS IN TREATMENT OF STONE PATIENTS - MORBIDITY RELATED TO INDWELLING TIMES
    ELFAQIH, SR
    SHAMSUDDIN, AB
    CHAKRABARTI, A
    ATASSI, R
    KARDAR, AH
    OSMAN, MK
    HUSAIN, I
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1991, 146 (06) : 1487 - 1491
  • [7] Clinical evaluation of double-pigtail sent in patients with upper urinary tract diseases: Report of 2685 cases
    Hao, Ping
    Li, Weibing
    Song, Caiping
    Yan, Junan
    Song, Bo
    Li, Longkun
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2008, 22 (01) : 65 - 70
  • [8] Kartal IG, 2018, UROL J, V15, P323, DOI 10.22037/uj.v0i0.4592
  • [9] Preventing the forgotten ureteral stent: Implementation of a web-based Stent registry with automatic recall application
    Lynch, Mark F.
    Ghani, Khurshid R.
    Frost, Ian
    Anson, Ken M.
    [J]. UROLOGY, 2007, 70 (03) : 423 - 426
  • [10] Urinary Incontinence and Urosepsis due to Forgotten Ureteral Stent
    Martin Barreiro, Diego
    Belen Losada, Johanna
    Castro Montiel, Francisco
    Lafos, Norberto
    [J]. UROLOGY CASE REPORTS, 2016, 8 : 63 - 65