Is routine ureteral stenting really necessary after retrograde intrarenal surgery?

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorOzyuvali, Ekrem
dc.contributor.authorResorlu, Berkan
dc.contributor.authorOguz, Ural
dc.contributor.authorYildiz, Yildiray
dc.contributor.authorSahin, Tolga
dc.contributor.authorSenocak, Cagri
dc.contributor.authorBozkurt, Omer Faruk
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-27T21:19:56Z
dc.date.available2025-01-27T21:19:56Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.departmentÇanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractObjectives: To investigate the situations in which ureteral double-J stent should be used after retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Patients and Methods: Patients with no ureteral double-J stent after RIRS constituted Group 1, and those with double-J stent after RIRS constituted Group 2. Patients' age and gender, renal stone characteristics (location and dimension), stone-free status, VAS score 8 hours after surgery, post-procedural renal colic attacks, length of hospitalization, requirement for re-hospitalization, time to rehospitalization and secondary procedure requirements were analyzed. Results: RIRS was performed on 162 renal units. Double-J stent was used in 121 (74.6%) of these after RIRS, but not in the other 41 (25.4%). At radiological monitoring at the first month postoperatively after RIRS, complete stone-free status was determined in 122 (75.3%) renal units, while residual stone was present in 40 (24.6%). No significant differences were observed between the groups in terms of duration of fluoroscopy (p = 0.142), operation (p = 0.108) or hospitalization times (p = 0.798). VAS values determined routinely on the evening of surgery were significantly higher in Group 1 than in Group 2 (p = 0.025). Twenty-eight (17.2%) presentations were made to the emergency clinic due to renal colic within 1 month after surgery. Double-J catheter was present in 24 (85.7%) of these patients. Conclusions: Routine double-J stent insertion after RIRS is not essential since it increases costs, morbidity and operation time.
dc.identifier.doi10.4081/aiua.2015.1.72
dc.identifier.endpage75
dc.identifier.issn1124-3562
dc.identifier.issn2282-4197
dc.identifier.issue1
dc.identifier.pmid25847901
dc.identifier.startpage72
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2015.1.72
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12428/28775
dc.identifier.volume87
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000440260100015
dc.identifier.wosqualityN/A
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherPagepress Publ
dc.relation.ispartofArchivio Italiano Di Urologia E Andrologia
dc.relation.publicationcategoryinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.snmzKA_WoS_20250125
dc.subjectRetrograde intrarenal surgery
dc.subjectUreteral stent
dc.subjectUrolithiasis
dc.titleIs routine ureteral stenting really necessary after retrograde intrarenal surgery?
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu