Efficacy and Safety of Emergency Ureteroscopic Management of Ureteral Calculi

Youn, Jun Ho; Kim, Sung Soo; Yu, Ji Hyeong; Sung, Luck Hee; Noh, Choong Hee; Chung, Jae Yong

doi:10.4111/kju.2012.53.9.632

Cited by 23 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They observed that greater stonefree rate was achieved in patients with stones < 10 mm (95.8% versus 89%; p = 0.002) and in those presenting with stones in distal ureter (94.6 versus 71.4%; p = 0.004). The role of stone location and size as key factors in determining the success of URS was also confirmed by Youn et al who found a higher stone-free rate when only distal ureteral stones were considered (97.6 versus 89.8%), and fewer complications when only stones <10 mm were taken into consideration (2.7 versus 7.96%) [16]. Picozzi et al estimated that every 1 mm of increased diameter over 8 mm determine a reduction of stone-free rate of 5% in distal ureter and 8.1% in proximal ureters [11].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 70%

“…The definition of emergency varied among the studies from 12 to 48 h from admission to the emergency room. Stone-free status was defined on postoperative imaging (KUB in 3 studies and CT scan in one), which was done at 1 month in most studies (Table 1) [16][17][18][19]. In six studies (4 prospective randomized controlled and 2 retrospective case-control studies), emergent ESWL (n = 356) was compared to delayed ESWL (n = 355).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Youn [16] Mucosal Injury (I) 3 (4.5%) 9 (5.6%) Haematuria (I) -6 (3.7%) Guercio [17] Haematuria (I) 1 (0.7%) -Urinary tract infection (II) 1 (0.7%) 1 (1%) Ureteral stricture (I) -1 (1%) Sarica [18] Mucosal injury (I) 6 (7.9%) 2 (2.9%) Haematuria (I) 3 (3.9%) -Matani [19] Flank and early ESWL (86.3 versus 80%; p = 0.31), although they only included upper ureteral stones <10 mm. Notably, in this study, the need of auxiliary procedure and number of ESWL sessions was significantly lower when ESWL is performed within the first 48 h [22].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Emergent versus delayed lithotripsy for obstructing ureteral stones: a cumulative analysis of comparative studies

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Emergent lithotripsy, either ureteroscopic or extracorporeal, can be offered as an effective and safe treatment for patients with symptomatic ureteral stone. If amenable to ESWL, based on stone and patient characteristics, an emergent approach should be strongly considered. Ureteroscopy in the emergent setting is mostly reserved for distally located stones. The implementation of these therapeutic approaches is likely to be dictated by their availability.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 70%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Emergent versus delayed lithotripsy for obstructing ureteral stones: a cumulative analysis of comparative studies

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3 Emergency URS reduces the need for medications (analgesics, anti-inflammatory) and prolonged hospitalization. This is achieved at a lower cost, 27 with comparable success and safety. Emergency URS is recommended, on the other hand, at the expense of discontinuing conservative (medical) treatment, admission, anesthesia and abandoning the expectant approach for spontaneous stone passage.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emergency versus elective ureteroscopic treatment of ureteral stones

Matani

Al-Ghazo

Al-Azab

et al. 2013

CUAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: This retrospective study investigates the role of the emergency ureteroscopic (URS) approach in the definitive treatment of ureteric stones. Methods: We reviewed all patients admitted for ureteric stones from May 2003 to December 2010. Those who underwent URS stone treatment were selected and stratified into emergency (EMG) and elective groups (ELG). Emergency URS is defined as URS being performed within 24 hours of admission to the emergency room. The main indication for emergency treatment was refractory ureteric colic in spite of narcotic analgesia. Both groups were statistically compared in terms of their patient-, stone-and outcome-related variables. The overall success rate was defined by the clearance of the stone and/or presence of residual fragments (<3 mm) at the end of 4-week follow-up period. Results: In total, 903 patients were suitable for analysis with 244 and 659 patients in the EMG and ELG, respectively. Age, sex and comorbidities were comparable in both groups. Average ages were 43.4 ± 15.31 and 45.6 ± 13.24 years among EMG and ELG, respectively. Stones had an average size of 0.92 ± 0.49 (in the EMG group) and 0.96 ± 0.53 cm (in the ELG group). We found that 61.1% and 65.7% of stones were distally located in the EMG and ELG, respectively. EMG had a longer operative time (69 ± 21.03 vs. 57 ± 13.45 minutes) with comparable average hospital stays (1.9 days). Intra-operative double-J stents or ureteric catheter insertion was noted in 72.5 and 67.7% of EMG and ELG, respectively. The overall complication rates were reported in 13.1% in EMG and 14.4% in ELG. A higher rate of ureteric injuries (early and late) was documented in the EMG group (7% vs. 5.6%). Most of these injuries were minor and manageable without additional procedure and/or general anesthesia. Success was achieved in 90.6% and 91.8% of the EMG and ELG groups, respectively. Conclusion: With recent advances in technology, the growing trend toward one-stage definitive treatment, patient acceptability and rising concerns over financial aspects, emergency URS treatment of ureteric stones is evolving as a standard initial management option.

show abstract

“…This can be attributed to the following factors: failure after a trial of medical expulsion therapy (MET) would lead to the clinical decision for emergency ureteroscopy; the median waiting time for emergency surgery was 26h; and most patients would stay an additional day post-surgery for symptom monitoring before they are discharged. In contrast, EL is performed as Day Surgery procedures [4][5][6][7][8].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is it Feasible and Cost-Effective to Perform Emergency Ureteroscopic Treatment for Acute Ureteric Colic?

Yeow¹

2017

UNOAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Ureteroscopy is one of the treatment options for the management of refractory ureteric colic. Emergency Ureteroscopy can provide significant symptomatic relief and may reduce the number of hospital attendances compared to Elective Ureteroscopy. Data regarding cost, however, is scarce. Materials and Methods:In this retrospective review, all patients who underwent ureteroscopic treatment for ureteric colic in the year 2015 were identified. Patients who underwent ureteroscopic during an emergency admission for acute ureteric colic were classified as having had Emergency Ureteroscopy, while those who underwent elective ureteroscopy for ureteric colic were classified as having had Elective Ureteroscopy. Exclusion criteria included urinary tract infection, sepsis, prior ureteroscopic procedures and/or ureteric stenting. The primary outcome evaluated was cost; secondary outcomes included number of preoperative attendances for colic, operative outcomes and complications, as well as hospital re-attendances.Results: A total of 88 patients were identified, with 31 in the Emergency group, and 57 under the Elective group. EM was associated with significantly higher procedural and overall costs (p <0.001), but reduced hospital attendance for colic (p< 0.001). There were no significant differences between both groups in terms of stone clearance rate and postoperative reattendances. Conclusion:Emergency ureteroscopy management of ureteric colic is a reasonable treatment modality that reduces hospital attendance and has similar treatment outcomes as elective ureteroscopic treatment; albeit associated with higher financial costs.

show abstract

Efficacy and Safety of Emergency Ureteroscopic Management of Ureteral Calculi

Cited by 23 publications

References 21 publications

Emergent versus delayed lithotripsy for obstructing ureteral stones: a cumulative analysis of comparative studies

Emergent versus delayed lithotripsy for obstructing ureteral stones: a cumulative analysis of comparative studies

Emergency versus elective ureteroscopic treatment of ureteral stones

Is it Feasible and Cost-Effective to Perform Emergency Ureteroscopic Treatment for Acute Ureteric Colic?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About