Home
Abstract
My Abstract(s)
Login
ePosters
Back
Final Presentation Format
Moderated Poster Abstract
Eposter Presentation
Eposter in PDF Format
https://storage.unitedwebnetwork.com/files/1237/fa895046160028dcdd9070cb30033550.pdf
Accept format: PDF. The file size should not be more than 5MB
Eposter in Image Format
https://storage.unitedwebnetwork.com/files/1237/54ce696de1c5a2dab9747824db9d0f97.png
Accept format: PNG/JPG/WEBP. The file size should not be more than 2MB
Presentation Date / Time
Submission Status
Submitted
Abstract
Abstract Title
Magnetic Stents versus Stents on Extraction Strings: A retrospective review of post-ureteroscopy complications
Presentation Type
Moderated Poster Abstract
Manuscript Type
Clinical Research
Abstract Category *
Endourology: Urolithiasis
Author's Information
Number of Authors (including submitting/presenting author) *
7
No more than 10 authors can be listed (as per the Good Publication Practice (GPP) Guidelines).
Please ensure the authors are listed in the right order.
Country
Australia
Co-author 1
Paul Kim paul.kim4@health.nsw.gov.au Royal North Shore Hospital Urology St Leonards Australia *
Co-author 2
Juanita Chui juanita.noeline@gmail.com Royal North Shore Hospital St Leonards Australia -
Co-author 3
Emma Hodgson Emma.Hodgson@health.nsw.gov.au Royal North Shore Hospital St Leonards Australia -
Co-author 4
James Kovacic james.kovacic93@gmail.com Royal North Shore Hospital Urology St Leonards Australia -
Co-author 5
Andrew Shepherd arh.shepherd@gmail.com Royal North Shore Hospital Urology St Leonards Australia -
Co-author 6
Ankur Dhar ankurdhar@gmail.com Royal North Shore Hospital Urology St Leonards Australia -
Co-author 7
Amanda Chung amandashujun.chung@gmail.com Royal North Shore Hospital Urology St Leonards Australia -
Co-author 8
Co-author 9
Co-author 10
Co-author 11
Co-author 12
Co-author 13
Co-author 14
Co-author 15
Co-author 16
Co-author 17
Co-author 18
Co-author 19
Co-author 20
Abstract Content
Introduction
Post-ureteroscopy ureteric stents are commonly used after operative management of kidney stone disease to maintain internalised renal drainage of which the common variety used is a double-J conventional ureteric stent. A variety of alternative ureteric stents have been used in practice including stents on extraction string (SOES), ureteric catheters and magnetic ureteric stents. The latter of which have shown to have increased benefits over conventional stents, especially around the ease and cost-effectiveness of removal. However, there is a paucity of data comparing these alternative methods directly.
Materials and Methods
A retrospective analysis of patients who received magnetic stents or SOES after ureteroscopy for kidney stone disease at Royal North Shore Hospital (RNSH) over two years (2021-2022) was undertaken since introduction of magnetic stents at RNSH in 2021, identifying 118 patients for analysis. A review of medical records was performed to extract patient demographic data (age, sex), the type of stent used, stent dwell time, and 30-day morbidity and mortality. Adult patients (18 years of age or older) with unilateral kidney stone disease undergoing uncomplicated unilateral ureteroscopy with post-operative ureteric stent insertion were included.
Results
There was a statistically significant reduction in stent dwell time noted with SOES (median = 5 days, IQR 3-7) compared to magnetic stents (median = 13 days, IQR 9-16). However, this may be reflective of the increased rates of stent migration (n = 9/98) and premature removal (n=18/98) compared to the magnetic stent population (n = 0/20) as well as patients having the option to self-remove their stent at home. We identified statistically significant lower rates of complication within 30 days for magnetic stents (0/20 = 0%) compared to SOES (21/98 = 21.4%) (P < 0.05). Additionally, our results reflect the lower risk of detachment and dislodgement in magnetic stents compared to SOES. When comparing rates of complicated removal requiring flexible cystoscopy there were no significant differences found between the two methods.
Conclusions
This is the first retrospective review directly comparing their use demonstrating decreased 30-day complication rates and stent dislodgement rates in magnetic stents compared to SOES. In future, a prospective study accounting for cost-effectiveness, patient satisfaction, and waitlist management could provide greater insight into determining if magnetic stents are more suitable than SOES for stenting post-ureteroscopy
Keywords
Endourology, magnetic stents, urolithiasis
Figure 1
Figure 1 Caption
Figure 2
Figure 2 Caption
Figure 3
Figure 3 Caption
Figure 4
Figure 4 Caption
Figure 5
Figure 5 Caption
Character Count
2086
Vimeo Link
Presentation Details
Session
Free Paper Moderated Poster(02): Endourology Urolithiasis
Date
Aug. 14 (Thu.)
Time
16:36 - 16:40
Presentation Order
15