输尿管磁性支架的“来龙去脉”:一项新的泌尿道学创新。

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":"输尿管磁性支架的“来龙去脉”:一项新的泌尿道学创新。","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

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。

摘要图片

摘要图片

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

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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