The efficacy and safety of ureteral dilation and long-term type ureteral stent for patients with ureteral obstruction

2Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: This study was conducted to investigate the efficacy and safety of ureteral dilation and placement of a long-term ureteral stent for patients with various types of ureteral obstructions. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 39 patients presenting with ureteral obstruction secondary to malignant strictures (n=9) or nonmalignant strictures (n=30). The mean age of these patients was 55.8±16.1 years (range, 13-87 years). All patients underwent retrograde ureteral balloon dilation and placement of one to three ureteral stents. Stent patency rate and complications including febrile urinary tract infection, stent encrustation, and stent fragmentation were recorded. Results: A total of 117 ureteral stents were implanted during the 83 procedures. Three stents were placed in seven patients and two stents in 20 patients. The patency rate was 95.2% with a mean 75-day follow-up. There was no encrustation in 104 stents and Grade 1 in 13 stents. The patency rate was similar between the patients with malignant strictures and those with nonmalignant strictures (100% vs. 94.7%, p=0.57). However, three episodes of febrile urinary tract infection were noted only in patients with malignant strictures. The improvement of hydronephrosis and complications were also comparable between those patients with ureteral stents indwelling for >90 days and those for <90 days. No stent fragmentation was found in any of the patients. Conclusion: We demonstrated that ureteral dilation and placement of a single or multiple ureteral stents was effective and safe for patients with ureteral obstruction.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kao, M. H., & Wang, C. C. (2015). The efficacy and safety of ureteral dilation and long-term type ureteral stent for patients with ureteral obstruction. Urological Science, 26(1), 65–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urols.2014.06.001

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free