“There are some situations where I do place stents, but I am really trying to limit [my] amount of stent usage,” says Christopher Allam, MD.
In this video, Christopher Allam, MD, discusses the take-home messages from the recent Journal of Endourology study, “The Role of Routine Ureteral Stenting Following Uncomplicated Ureteroscopic Treatment for Upper Ureteral and Renal Stones: A Randomized Control Trial.” Allam is program director of the SAUSHEC Urology Residency, urology consultant to the Air Force Surgeon General, Director of Air Force Endourology, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Surgery, and an assistant professor of surgery at Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Maryland.
I have. I definitely try not to stent unless I feel it's absolutely necessary. There are some situations where I do place stents, but I am really trying to limit [my] amount of stent usage. It's nice to have a little bit of evidence behind me. There's more research that needs to be done in this area, but it's nice to have some data saying that patients probably will do better symptom wise and their complication rate should be similar. Anecdotally, I have not seen any differences when I don't leave stents compared to when I do leave stents.
I think the take-home message is that when we are in the upper ureter and in the kidney treating stones using ureteroscopy techniques, that we don't necessarily always have to put up a stent. I think the reflex by a lot of urologists, and even me early in my practice, was I did ureteroscopy, I'm going to leave a stent, the patient will take out the stent, and we'll go from there. Other studies have shown and now this study shows in the proximal ureter and kidney that we don't necessarily have to do it. Patients probably are going to be symptomatically better without stents, and they seem to do just as well as if we place stents.
Is there anything you would like to add?
The one thing I want to mention is that this was a small sample size. It wasn't a randomized controlled trial; it did have a proven questionnaire. So I think this small sample size did show that there is definitely benefit to not leaving stents; it's safe to do. But obviously larger, randomized, controlled, multi-institutional studies need to be done. But hopefully this study at least shows the average urologist that we don't always have to reflexively place a stent just because we did ureteroscopy.
This transcription was edited for clarity.
Bundled payment program covers kidney stone care
July 22nd 2024"One day, we're going to have to move away from fee for service, so we'd be wise to try to navigate those waters ahead of time, so we're not left dealing with the aftermath when someone else has implemented it for us," says Ruchika Talwar, MD.
FDA grants 510(k) clearance to Ambu’s single-use ureteroscope
July 2nd 2024"This clearance in the US of our new ureteroscopy solution not only demonstrates a market expansion for Ambu; it is a testament to the progressive shift towards single-use solutions within the field of urology," says Britt Meelby Jensen.
Data support shock wave lithotripsy for pediatric patients with kidney stones
May 28th 2024Regarding patient-reported outcomes, those who underwent URS showed higher urinary symptoms, greater pain intensity, and greater pain interference at 1 week following surgery compared with those who underwent SWL.