We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Is a 2-week duration sufficient for stenting in endopyelotomy?
Journal of Urology 2003 March
PURPOSE: Internal stenting is an integral part of endopyelotomy. Studies in animals show good healing after 1 to 2 weeks of ureterotomy. Inherent stent related problems warrant a minimum possible duration of stenting without compromising the results of endopyelotomy. We performed a prospective randomized trial to evaluate the optimum duration of stenting after endopyelotomy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 57 consecutive patients with primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction were randomized to undergo 7/14Fr internal endopyelotomy stent placement for 2 (group 1) and 4 (group 2) weeks. A symptom based questionnaire was administered to all patients at stent removal. Followup was done with diuretic scanning at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months and then yearly, and thereafter with diuretic renography.
RESULTS: In each group 26 patients were available for evaluation. The 2 groups were comparable in terms of age, sex, symptoms and ipsilateral glomerular filtration rate. Mean followup was 22.3 (range 12 to 36) and 21.3 months (range 12 to 35) in groups 1 and 2, respectively. At the end of 1 year 24 group 1 (92.3%) and 23 group 2 (90.3%) patients had an improved drainage pattern. This difference was not significant. Stent related symptoms were present in a good proportion of patients in groups 1 and 2 but there was a significant difference in the incidence of urinary tract infections (11.5% versus 38.1%, p = 0.04). Of the group 2 patients 64% preferred 2 weeks of stenting.
CONCLUSIONS: Two weeks seems to be a sufficient duration to allow functional restoration across the ureteropelvic junction after endopyelotomy and decrease stent related complications.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 57 consecutive patients with primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction were randomized to undergo 7/14Fr internal endopyelotomy stent placement for 2 (group 1) and 4 (group 2) weeks. A symptom based questionnaire was administered to all patients at stent removal. Followup was done with diuretic scanning at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months and then yearly, and thereafter with diuretic renography.
RESULTS: In each group 26 patients were available for evaluation. The 2 groups were comparable in terms of age, sex, symptoms and ipsilateral glomerular filtration rate. Mean followup was 22.3 (range 12 to 36) and 21.3 months (range 12 to 35) in groups 1 and 2, respectively. At the end of 1 year 24 group 1 (92.3%) and 23 group 2 (90.3%) patients had an improved drainage pattern. This difference was not significant. Stent related symptoms were present in a good proportion of patients in groups 1 and 2 but there was a significant difference in the incidence of urinary tract infections (11.5% versus 38.1%, p = 0.04). Of the group 2 patients 64% preferred 2 weeks of stenting.
CONCLUSIONS: Two weeks seems to be a sufficient duration to allow functional restoration across the ureteropelvic junction after endopyelotomy and decrease stent related complications.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Prevention and treatment of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in people with diabetes mellitus: a focus on glucose control and comorbidities.Diabetologia 2024 April 17
British Society for Rheumatology guideline on management of adult and juvenile onset Sjögren disease.Rheumatology 2024 April 17
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Albumin: a comprehensive review and practical guideline for clinical use.European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2024 April 13
Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Clinical Pearls for Primary Care Providers and Gastroenterologists.Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2024 April
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app