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, Brandon Els, Efthimia Daras, Tracy Kataka, Sadiyabanu Safiq Gulamali, S'babalwe Ntakana, Marlon Perera, 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.
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。