The "ins and outs" of the magnetic ureteral stent: A novel innovation in Endourology.

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q4 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Current Urology Pub Date : 2023-06-01 DOI:10.1097/CU9.0000000000000104
Vishal Damodaran, Brandon Els, Efthimia Daras, Tracy Kataka, Sadiyabanu Safiq Gulamali, S'babalwe Ntakana, Marlon Perera, Ahmed Adam
{"title":"The \"ins and outs\" of the magnetic ureteral stent: A novel innovation in Endourology.","authors":"Vishal Damodaran,&nbsp;Brandon Els,&nbsp;Efthimia Daras,&nbsp;Tracy Kataka,&nbsp;Sadiyabanu Safiq Gulamali,&nbsp;S'babalwe Ntakana,&nbsp;Marlon Perera,&nbsp;Ahmed Adam","doi":"10.1097/CU9.0000000000000104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ureteral stents play a major role in maintaining ureteral patency. Various innovations are advocated in the design and subsequent removal of traditional double-J ureteral stents, such as the magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent (MEDJUS). This stent facilitates outpatient removal using a magnetic stent removal device. This systematic review was conducted to analyze the published role, efficacy, and outcomes of MEDJUS.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>After PROSPERO registration (CRD42021235739), an electronic database search (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science) was performed on December 31, 2020. The search terms were as follows: \"<i>magnetic</i>,\" \"<i>ureteric,</i>\" \"<i>stent</i>,\" <i>\"double-J,</i>\" <i>\"urotech</i>,\" and \"<i>Black-Star</i>.\"</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine studies with a total of 685 patients were included in the systematic review. The total number of MEDJUS procedures used was 498 (73%) compared to the 187 (27%) traditional double-J stent method. Magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent extraction failure was reported in 8 cases (1.61%). Compared with traditional stents, MEDJUS showed a cost benefit in 5/5 studies. Better pain scores (during stent in situ) and (at stent removal) were observed in 2/3 and 3/4 of the studies, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent may serve as a viable alternative to traditional double-J stents, offering cost and pain benefits with similar rates of complications. Magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent also offers relative ease of extraction and a reduced need for inpatient removal. This ambulatory stent removal technique has forged its use in modern urological practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":39147,"journal":{"name":"Current Urology","volume":"17 2","pages":"92-99"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/99/79/curr-urol-17-092.PMC10489510.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CU9.0000000000000104","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Ureteral stents play a major role in maintaining ureteral patency. Various innovations are advocated in the design and subsequent removal of traditional double-J ureteral stents, such as the magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent (MEDJUS). This stent facilitates outpatient removal using a magnetic stent removal device. This systematic review was conducted to analyze the published role, efficacy, and outcomes of MEDJUS.

Materials and methods: After PROSPERO registration (CRD42021235739), an electronic database search (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science) was performed on December 31, 2020. The search terms were as follows: "magnetic," "ureteric," "stent," "double-J," "urotech," and "Black-Star."

Results: Nine studies with a total of 685 patients were included in the systematic review. The total number of MEDJUS procedures used was 498 (73%) compared to the 187 (27%) traditional double-J stent method. Magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent extraction failure was reported in 8 cases (1.61%). Compared with traditional stents, MEDJUS showed a cost benefit in 5/5 studies. Better pain scores (during stent in situ) and (at stent removal) were observed in 2/3 and 3/4 of the studies, respectively.

Conclusions: Magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent may serve as a viable alternative to traditional double-J stents, offering cost and pain benefits with similar rates of complications. Magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent also offers relative ease of extraction and a reduced need for inpatient removal. This ambulatory stent removal technique has forged its use in modern urological practice.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
输尿管磁性支架的“来龙去脉”:一项新的泌尿道学创新。
背景:输尿管支架在维持输尿管通畅中起着重要作用。传统的双j型输尿管支架在设计和后续取出过程中提倡各种创新,如磁端双j型输尿管支架(MEDJUS)。这种支架便于门诊病人使用磁性支架移除装置进行移除。本系统综述分析MEDJUS已发表的作用、疗效和结局。材料和方法:在PROSPERO注册(CRD42021235739)后,于2020年12月31日进行电子数据库检索(PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane Library、Scopus和Web of Science)。搜索词如下:“磁性”、“输尿管”、“支架”、“双j”、“urotech”和“Black-Star”。结果:共有685名患者的9项研究被纳入系统评价。MEDJUS手术总数为498例(73%),而传统双j支架方法为187例(27%)。磁端双j输尿管支架取出失败8例(1.61%)。与传统支架相比,MEDJUS在5/5的研究中显示出成本优势。在2/3和3/4的研究中分别观察到更好的疼痛评分(支架原位时)和(支架移除时)。结论:磁端双j型输尿管支架可作为传统双j型输尿管支架的可行替代方案,其成本和疼痛方面的优势与并发症发生率相似。磁端双j输尿管支架也提供了相对容易的提取和减少住院切除的需要。这种动态支架移除技术在现代泌尿外科实践中得到了广泛应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Current Urology
Current Urology Medicine-Urology
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
96
期刊最新文献
Bilateral nephrolithiasis and upper tract transitional cell carcinoma in horseshoe kidney. Visual guidelines and tutoring in pediatric urological surgery. Hypoxia activates the hypoxia-inducible factor-1α/vascular endothelial growth factor pathway in a prostatic stromal cell line: A mechanism for the pathogenesis of benign prostatic hyperplasia Comparison of midurethral tape with autologous rectus fascial sling surgery for stress urinary incontinence: A systematic review and meta-analysis Partial versus radical nephrectomy for T1b renal cell carcinoma: A comparison of efficacy and prognostic factors based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1