Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The thermo‐expandable metallic ureteric stent: an 11‐year follow‐up

The thermo‐expandable metallic ureteric stent: an 11‐year follow‐up OBJECTIVE To review our long‐term use of the thermo‐expandable metallic ureteric stent, (model 051, PNN Medical, Denmark) for ureteric obstruction, and review current reports on its use. PATIENTS AND METHODS Data were collected prospectively on all patients who had a Memokath 051 ureteric stent inserted between November 1996 and November 2007. The standard stent, and wide and dual expansion versions were used. The stricture characteristics were recorded in a standard way. All stents were inserted by one surgeon in the UK and internationally, following a standard protocol. RESULTS In all, 74 stents were inserted into 55 patients in the study period (mean age 60 years, range 11–90). The indications for metallic stenting included primary stenting for malignancy, failed conventional open and endoscopic techniques, palliation, and where significant comorbidity limited repetitive stent changes. In 28 patients the obstruction was caused by malignancy, whereas in 27 it was caused by recurrent benign disease. The mean (range) hospital stay was 1.43 (0–7) days. Imaging after insertion showed normal or improved functional drainage in all but three patients, with immediate complications including urinary extravasation (one), poor thermo‐expansion (one) and equipment failure (locking assembly) (one). Late complications included migration (13), encrustation (two) and fungal infections (three). In all, 14 patients needed reinsertion (mean of 7.1 months, range 1–14) after insertion for migration (eight), encrustation (two), stricture progression (three) and incorrect stent length (one). Overall, 29 patients have died with the stents in‐situ. The mean (range) follow‐up was 16 (4–98) months. CONCLUSIONS The thermo‐expandable metallic Memokath 051 ureteric stent offers effective and durable long‐term relief from ureteric obstruction, and is a safe alternative to conventional JJ stenting. In addition there is an emerging role in palliation and the primary management of ureteric strictures. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png BJU International Wiley

The thermo‐expandable metallic ureteric stent: an 11‐year follow‐up

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/the-thermo-expandable-metallic-ureteric-stent-an-11-year-follow-up-VoC92e5wJi

References (15)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
"Copyright © 2009 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company"
ISSN
1464-4096
eISSN
1464-410X
DOI
10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.08018.x
pmid
18778347
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To review our long‐term use of the thermo‐expandable metallic ureteric stent, (model 051, PNN Medical, Denmark) for ureteric obstruction, and review current reports on its use. PATIENTS AND METHODS Data were collected prospectively on all patients who had a Memokath 051 ureteric stent inserted between November 1996 and November 2007. The standard stent, and wide and dual expansion versions were used. The stricture characteristics were recorded in a standard way. All stents were inserted by one surgeon in the UK and internationally, following a standard protocol. RESULTS In all, 74 stents were inserted into 55 patients in the study period (mean age 60 years, range 11–90). The indications for metallic stenting included primary stenting for malignancy, failed conventional open and endoscopic techniques, palliation, and where significant comorbidity limited repetitive stent changes. In 28 patients the obstruction was caused by malignancy, whereas in 27 it was caused by recurrent benign disease. The mean (range) hospital stay was 1.43 (0–7) days. Imaging after insertion showed normal or improved functional drainage in all but three patients, with immediate complications including urinary extravasation (one), poor thermo‐expansion (one) and equipment failure (locking assembly) (one). Late complications included migration (13), encrustation (two) and fungal infections (three). In all, 14 patients needed reinsertion (mean of 7.1 months, range 1–14) after insertion for migration (eight), encrustation (two), stricture progression (three) and incorrect stent length (one). Overall, 29 patients have died with the stents in‐situ. The mean (range) follow‐up was 16 (4–98) months. CONCLUSIONS The thermo‐expandable metallic Memokath 051 ureteric stent offers effective and durable long‐term relief from ureteric obstruction, and is a safe alternative to conventional JJ stenting. In addition there is an emerging role in palliation and the primary management of ureteric strictures.

Journal

BJU InternationalWiley

Published: Feb 1, 2009

Keywords: ; ; ; ;

There are no references for this article.