Presentation Authors: Takashi Yoshida*, Takaaki Inoue, Makoto Taguchi, Tomoaki Matsuzaki, Takashi Murota, Hidefumi Kinoshita, Tadashi Matsuda, Osaka, Japan
Introduction: To compare the efficacy and safety of complete intra-ureteral stent placement (CIU-SP) versus conventional stent placement (C-SP) for ureteral stent-related symptoms.
Methods: Eighty-six patients who underwent loop-type ureteral stent placement with extraction strings after lithotripsy were randomized into the CIU-SP or C-SP group. The ureteral stent had been placed until postoperative day (POD) 14. The visual analog scale pain score, 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) score, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), and Overactive Bladder Symptom Score (OABSS) were evaluated on POD3 and POD14. The total amount of analgesics administered and stent-related complications were also assessed.
Results: Overall, 80 patients were analyzed. The pain scores were significantly lower in the CIU-SP than C-SP group (POD3: 4.85 vs. 9.78, P=0.003; POD14: 3.15 vs. 6.20, P=0.014). The total IPSS (POD3: 10.41 vs. 14.90, P=0.006; POD 14: 11.67 vs. 16.10, P=0.022) and total analgesic use (19.23 vs. 88.54 mg, P < 0.001) were significantly lower in the CIU-SP than C-SP group. However, the differences in the SF-36 scores and total OABSS were not significantly different. In the subgroup analysis, the pain score in the groin and bladder areas, IPSS-incomplete emptying, QoL index, IPSS-daytime frequency, and OABSS-daytime frequency were significantly better in the CIU-SP than C-SP group on POD3 and POD14 (all P < 0.05). There were no differences in the complication rates between the two groups.
Conclusions: CIU-SP may be associated with less ureteral stent-related discomfort than C-SP. This novel placement method is feasible and safe and can be immediately used in daily clinical practice.