Likelihood of retrograde double-J stenting according to ureteral obstructing pathology

Danilovic, Alexandre; Antonopoulos, Ioannis; Mesquita, Jose Luis Borges; Lucon, Antônio Marmo

doi:10.1590/s1677-55382005000500003

Cited by 20 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Out of 50 patients included in the study pain in the flank region was the major symptom occurring in 90% (45) patients whereas fever was present in 52% (26) patients and hematuria in 22%. 2 This was in contrast to study by Abdul Ghaffar et al which showed the most frequent presentation was pain and oliguria and anuria in 51.5%. 4 Kenan et al however showed comparable result of presenting symptom of pain in 100%.…”

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 57%

“…18 Danilovic et al evaluated the urgent ureteral decompression in patients with ureteral obstruction due to intrinsic and extrinsic pathologies and found that Retrograde double-J stenting failed in 9% (2/22) of intrinsic obstruction and in 52% (13/25) of extrinsic obstruction (p<0.001). 2 Mokhmalji et al evaluated the quality of life of patients undergoing diversion procedure and showed that retrograde ureteral stenting was more problematic and negatively affects the quality of life more than percutaneous nephrostomy. 3 Similarly Mays et al suggested that percutaneous nephrostomy only minimally affected quality of life.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Percutaneous nephrostomy or double J stenting, which is better modality for obstructive uropathy-a descriptive study

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 57%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Percutaneous nephrostomy or double J stenting, which is better modality for obstructive uropathy-a descriptive study

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…They are minimally invasive, easy to insert, obstruction can be easily relieved in most cases and they are proven to be invaluable in urological practice. Although their success rates appear high (around 88%) in intrinsic ureteric obstruction in some series [2] , there are high failure rates (35-52%) of indwelling ureteric stents in malignant extrinsic ureteric compression [3][4][5] . Failure is mainly due to recurrent stent occlusion and inability to place the stent endoscopically.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of a Segmental Thermoexpandable Metal Alloy Stent in the Management of Malignant Ureteric Obstruction: A Single Centre Experience in the UK

Zaman¹,

Poullis²,

Bach³

et al. 2011

Urol Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The Memokath 051™ is a semipermanent inert metal alloy ureteric stent which can bridge strictures and, compared to double J stents, causes less bladder irritation and pain, is more resistant to external compression forces and may be more effective in patients with malignant ureteric obstruction. We present our experience with this novel stent in such cases. Methods: All suitable patients referred to us with malignancy-associated ureteric strictures over a 4-year period had ureteric Memokath 051™ stents inserted. Data on aetiology and position of the strictures as well as length of the Memokath stents used and their efficacy and complications were recorded prospectively. Results: 42 ureteric Memokath 051™ stents were inserted in 37 patients (mean age 64 years). 40.5% of strictures were related to gynaecological cancer, 21% to bowel cancer, 14% were post radiation, 14% occurred in prostate cancer patients and 9.5% were found in other cancers. The mean follow-up was 22 months (range 5–60 months). The main complications were stent migrations in 5, urinary tract infections in 3 and blockage of stent due to progressive transitional cell carcinoma of the ureter in 2 cases. Conclusion: Memokath 051™ ureteric stents are safe, effective and durable in the long-term treatment of malignant strictures.

show abstract

“…1, 2, 3). In two studies reviewing retrograde ureteral stent placement in patients with obstruction due to ureteral stones, attempted stent placement was successful in[90% of cases [63,64].…”

Section: Retrograde Ureteral Stentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Urological Aspects of Management

Miller

Stoller

2011

Clinic Rev Bone Miner Metab

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Renal colic describes the acute, severe, and paroxysmal pain caused by the obstruction, distension, and resultant increase in intraluminal pressure of the urinary tract. The treatment of renal colic is aimed at relief of symptoms, facilitating urinary drainage to preserve renal function and treat infection and ultimately removal or passage of the obstructing stone. The medical management of renal colic is directed at mitigating, through pharmacologic intervention, one or more of the complex processes contributing to the clinical sequelae of obstruction including pain, nausea, vomiting, and irritative voiding symptoms. Numerous medications and combinations of medications have been employed with varying degrees of clinical success. Urgent interventions are typically directed at bypassing ureteral obstruction in order to palliate the patient until such time as definitive treatment may be accomplished or facilitate drainage to further the treatment of urinary tract infection. Timing and mode of urgent intervention are dependent on clinical factors, clinician expertise, and preference and the availability of specialized equipment. Definitive management of ureteral stones is typically performed in an elective fashion and seeks to balance the risks of intervention with the clinical benefits of the various treatment modalities. Treatment approaches vary according to clinical indications, patient preference, clinician expertise, and the availability of facilities and equipment. This section covers current supporting evidence and rationale, indications and techniques for the medical management, urgent intervention, and definitive management of acute renal colic caused by ureteral stones.

show abstract

Likelihood of retrograde double-J stenting according to ureteral obstructing pathology

Abstract: Retrograde double-J stenting has a low probability of success in extrinsic ureteral obstruction caused by prostate or bladder disease. Such cases might be best managed with percutaneous nephrostomy.

Cited by 20 publications

References 14 publications

Percutaneous nephrostomy or double J stenting, which is better modality for obstructive uropathy-a descriptive study

Percutaneous nephrostomy or double J stenting, which is better modality for obstructive uropathy-a descriptive study

Use of a Segmental Thermoexpandable Metal Alloy Stent in the Management of Malignant Ureteric Obstruction: A Single Centre Experience in the UK

Urological Aspects of Management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About