WCE 2017: Indications for Stent Omission after Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy Defined: An Initial Analysis

Vancouver, Canada (UroToday.com) Bower et al. present a retrospective study of 103 consecutive cases of ureteroscopy with lithotripsy performed by two fellowship-trained endourologists after having received specific guidelines for stent omission. Ten cases were excluded from their final analytical cohort. Of the remaining 93 cases, 35 (38%) were eligible for stent omission. However, stents were omitted in only 19 cases (20%).

There were fewer follow-up visits for patients in whom a stent was omitted, compared to those stinted patients who were eligible for stent omission (0.05 vs. 1.0 visits, p < 0.001). However, the background rate of follow-up visits in this group of patients, who met specific criteria for stent omission, is likely low. In addition, the patients who received no stents had been further selected out by the surgeons, as reflected in their 54% compliance rate with the guidelines. Thus, in this highly select group of patients, stent omission can safely be performed.

These authors do deserve praise for developing a set of guidelines for stent omission and for incorporating these guidelines into their practice. Nevertheless, a 54% internal compliance rate with their own guidelines should be an indicator of the amount of resistance these guidelines are likely to encounter among urologists in general.

Presented by: Paul E. Bower

Authors: Paul E. Bower, Jorge Pereira, Simone Thavaseelan, and Gyan Pareek
Affiliation: Brown University Medical School, Providence, RI

Written by: Michael Owyong (@ohyoungmike), LIFT Fellow, Department of Urology, UC Irvine Medical Center, Orange, CA at 35^th World Congress of Endourology – September 12-16, 2017, Vancouver, Canada

Login