Home > Riviste > Minerva Urology and Nephrology > Fascicoli precedenti > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2020 August;72(4) > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2020 August;72(4):451-63



Opzioni di pubblicazione
Per abbonarsi
Sottometti un articolo
Segnala alla tua biblioteca


Publication history
Per citare questo articolo


REVIEW   Free accessfree

Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2020 August;72(4):451-63

DOI: 10.23736/S0393-2249.19.03426-X


lingua: Inglese

The efficacy and safety of string stents after retrograde intrarenal surgery for urolithiasis

Athanasios DELLIS 1, 2, Panagiotis KALLIDONIS 3 , Constantinos ADAMOU 3, Nikolaos KOSTAKOPOULOS 4, Dimitrios KOTSIRIS 3, Panteleeimon NTASIOTIS 3, Athanasios G. PAPATSORIS 4,, Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Party of the European Association of Urology (EAU) Young Academic Urologists (YAU)

1 Second Department of Surgery, Aretaieion Academic Hospital, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece; 2 First Department of Urology, Laikon General Hospital, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece; 3 Department of Urology, University of Patras, Patras, Greece; 4 Second Department of Urology, Sismanoglio General Hospital, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece

INTRODUCTION: Ureteral stent insertion is frequently chosen after upper tract endourological procedures. The use of stents carrying a suture string is sometimes used to facilitate the extraction of the stent. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to provide stronger evidence for the efficacy of string stents, by comparing them to non-string stents, in matters of patients’ quality of life (QoL), stent-related symptoms (SRS) and complications.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review was conducted on PubMed, SCOPUS, Cochrane, EMBASE and Web of Science. The studies included were only comparative randomized controlled trials which included at least one group with tethered ureteral stent and one group with standard stent after the performance of endoscopic surgery for lithiasis of upper urinary tract. Primary endpoints were QoL expressed as general health, urinary symptoms as well as impact on work performance and SRS, expressed by VAS score. Secondary endpoints included complications such as stent migration, stent dislodgement, urinary tract infections (UTIs), emergency room visits and retained stent.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We identified nine studies to be included in the qualitative synthesis and 3 randomized controlled trials to be included in the quantitative synthesis and the meta-analysis. The statistical difference in the stent related QoL was insignificant. General health was less affected in the non-string group. The urinary symptoms and the impact on work performance were similar between the groups. VAS pain score during the time that the patients were stented was insignificantly less in the non-string group, while VAS pain score was higher in the non-string group at extraction. Stent dislodgement was more frequent in the string group. There was no difference between the groups concerning the rate of UTIs.
CONCLUSIONS: Non-string stents affected less the patients’ QoL, in terms of general health and urinary symptoms, caused less stent related pain in cases of stent in situ and caused stent dislodgment in fewer patients. On the contrary, string stents caused less pain at extraction. All the aforementioned differences did not reach statistical difference.

KEY WORDS: Urolithiasis; Stents; Calculi

inizio pagina