RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is recommended for treating staghorn stones or stones measuring > 20 mm. Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) or flexible ureteroscopy (URS) may be used as a complement. However, PCNL can cause trauma to the kidney parenchyma, and patients may find a noninvasive procedure, such as ESWL, to be more attractive. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficiency of MiniJFil® stenting associated with ESWL or second-line URS for the treatment of medium-to-large kidney stones. The MiniJFil® is a stent reduced to a suture of 0.3F attached to a renal pigtail. The entire ureter is occupied only by the suture of the stent. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the data of 28 patients. Twenty-four patients had kidney stones measuring > 15 mm (group 1) and four patients had staghorn stones (group 2). All of the patients were fitted with MiniJFil® 2 - 3 weeks before any treatment. ESWL was always our first-line therapy. Stone-free (SF) status was defined as no evidence of stones. RESULTS: In group 1, the mean largest and cumulative stone diameters, respectively, were 18.7 ± 5.7 mm and 45.0 ± 12.0 mm. In group 2, the mean volume was 6,288.4 ± 2,733.0 mm3. The overall SF was 96.4% (100% for group 1 and 75% for group 2). The mean number of sessions of ESWL and URS, respectively, was 1.4 ± 0.7 and 0.8 ± 0.9 in group 1 and 4.0 ± 2.0 and 1.5 ± 1.3 in group 2. The mean times to achieve these rates were 3.2 ± 1.7 months and 5.6 ± 2.3 months for groups 1 and 2, respectively. One patient in group 2 was treated with only three sessions of ESWL. Renal colic was observed in only five patients (17.9%). CONCLUSIONS: MiniJFil® stenting is safe and may be an alternative for the treatment of kidney stones during minimally invasive procedures.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Double-pigtail stent intolerance reduces patient's quality of life. By decreasing the amount of material within the bladder, it should be possible to attenuate stent's symptoms. We evaluated the tolerance of a new stent with a dedicated questionnaire. METHODS: The major innovation of the pigtail suture stent (PSS) is in the replacement of the lower part of the double-pigtail stent with a 0.3F suture. A total of 79 consecutive patients agreed to be fitted with a PSS. The double-pigtail stents of 24 patients complaining strongly of symptoms were replaced with PSS (group 1), and 55 other patients were fitted directly with the PSS after an ureteral endoscopic intervention (group 2). The questionnaire was prospectively administered to patients at baseline and Day 15 post-placement. RESULTS: All questionnaires were returned. In group 1, the replacement of the double-pigtail stent with a PSS significantly decreased urinary symptom scores (35.2 ± 7.5 vs. 23.6 ± 5.4; p = 2 × 10(-6)) and pain scores (11.0 ± 3.9 vs. 4.9 ± 3.1; p = 1 × 10(-7)). In group 1, the baseline scores were not significantly different from those of control group with double-pigtail stent. In group 2, the urinary scores with PSS were significantly different from those of baseline without stent. The scores of the two groups fitted with a PSS were not significantly different at Day 15 post-placement. Unexpectedly, following PSS implantation, we observe a clear dilation of the ureter without inflammation around the suture. CONCLUSIONS: The PSS significantly decreases stent's symptoms and constitutes a medical advance in the domain of ureteral stent tolerance.