Publication

Is intravesical stent position a predictor of associated morbidity?

Journal Paper/Review - Apr 24, 2015

Units
PubMed
Doi

Citation
Abt D, Mordasini L, Warzinek E, Schmid H, Haile S, Engeler D, Muellhaupt G. Is intravesical stent position a predictor of associated morbidity?. Korean J Urol 2015; 56:370-8.
Type
Journal Paper/Review (English)
Journal
Korean J Urol 2015; 56
Publication Date
Apr 24, 2015
Issn Electronic
2005-6745
Pages
370-8
Brief description/objective

PURPOSE
Temporary drainage of the upper urinary tract by use of internal ureteral stents is a common procedure that is often associated with a variety of symptoms. The role of intravesical stent position in associated morbidity is controversial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
The German version of the ureteral stent symptom questionnaire (USSQ) was completed by 73 patients with an indwelling ureteral stent the day before stent removal. Intravesical stent position was classified into 3 categories by x-ray before stent removal. The influence of intravesical stent position on USSQ score was analyzed, including subscores and single items.

RESULTS
Intravesical stent position showed no significant influence on associated morbidity. The median USSQ total score in all patients was 77.5 (range, 30-147). Patients with ipsilateral stents (69.0; range, 30-122) tended to have lower total scores than did those with tangential (86.5; range, 30-122) or contralateral (77.0; range, 31-147) stents, but the differences were not statistically significant (p=0.35). The USSQ subscores for urinary symptoms (p=0.80), body pain (p=0.80), general health (p=0.16), work performance (p=0.07), additional problems (p=0.81), and all of the USSQ single items of interest in the context of stent length also did not differ significantly between the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS
Intravesical stent position did not significantly influence associated morbidity in our study. An appropriate stent length should be chosen to avoid dislocation. However, complex calculations of optimum stent length, time-consuming manipulations, and costly stock holding of various stent sizes to obtain the perfect stent position do not seem worthwhile.