Feasibility and safety of magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent insertion and removal in children

Current Status of Ureteric Stents on Extraction Strings and Other Non-cystoscopic Removal Methods in the Paediatric Setting: A Systematic Review on Behalf of the European Association of Urology (EAU) Young Academic Urology (YAU) Urolithiasis Group

“…12 studies were identified for inclusion in this review (Table 1 and Supplementary Figure 1) [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21]. Three studies investigated use of SOS whereby a thread attached to the distal end of the stent, which can be taped to the inner thigh of the patient and can be manually removed at follow up [10][11][12].…”

“…Three studies investigated use of SOS whereby a thread attached to the distal end of the stent, which can be taped to the inner thigh of the patient and can be manually removed at follow up [10][11][12]. Four studies evaluated magnetic retrieval device, which use a magnet attached to the distal end of the stent which can be withdrawn with a magnetic retrieval device [13][14][15][16]. Three studies implemented use of modified feeding tubes with a suture loop attached the end to snare to the distal end of the stent [17][18][19].…”

“…None of the SOS studies provided information on operation time for stent removal (Table 2). In the magnet group, Chalhoub et al recorded mean time of 4 minutes (range 1-25 minutes) [15]. For the modified feeding tubes with suture loop, two of the studies revealed significantly shorter procedural times compared to standard cystoscopy.…”

“…QoL measurement was done poorly across all the studies with only two studies implementing some kind of pain assessment. Chalhoub et al reported mean pain score of 3/10 for magnetic devices and Shao et al recorded lower pain scores with use of their modified feeding tube (36% vs.17%) although the assessment tool was not specified [15,18].…”

Feasibility and Safety of a Simple Non-cystoscopic Double-J Tube Removal Technique in Children

“…Several new technologies and materials have been reported to facilitate the removal of the double-J tube through a non-cystoscopic approach. Some examples are as follows: the application of double-J tube with magnetic ends (1)(2)(3)(4), surgical techniques for external placement of the double-J tube (5), and the percutaneous antegrade removal technique (6). However, these methods have certain limitations, such as the high cost of materials, requirement of technical expertise and additional surgical interventions, which increase the risk of complications.…”