Emergency versus elective ureteroscopic treatment of ureteral stones

Success rate and complications of performing elective ureteroscopy in <1 week versus over 1 week from renal colic initiation in ureteral stones larger than 6 mm

Background

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes, success rate, and complications of performing elective ureteroscopy at different times: <1 week from renal colic initiation (early) and more than 1 week from renal colic initiation (late) in patients with ureteral stone larger than 6 mm.

Materials and Methods

This comparative observational study was conducted on 338 consecutive patients. Patients were evaluated in two groups: patients who underwent ureteroscopy in <1 week (A) and patients who underwent ureteroscopy in more than 1 week (B) from renal colic initiation. Helical unenhanced computed tomography was used to assess the size, location, and hardness of stone for all patients. Operation success was defined as complete clearance of stone with no stone residue (stone free) at 2-week postoperative ultrasonography with no need to further interventions. Operation data were collected using medical records, and postoperative complications were investigated at 2 weeks postoperative follow-up visits.

Results

Group A included 165 patients and Group B included 173 patients. The overall mean stone size was 8.60 ± 1.12 mm: for Group A 9.13 ± 0.94 mm and for Group B 8.10 ± 1.04 mm (P < 0.001). Stone residues were found in 11 patients: 9 in Group A (5.4%) and 2 in Group B (1.1%) (P = 0.026). Nine patients needed repeated ureteroscopy: 8 (4.8%) in Group A and 1 (0.6%) in Group B (P = 0.015). A double-J stent was used for 85 (51.5%) patients in Group A and 66 (38.2%) patients in Group B (P = 0.016). Major intraoperative complications did not happen in any patients. Fifty-three (32.1%) patients in Group A and 28 (16.2%) patients in Group B suffered from postoperative complications (P = 0.001).

Conclusion

Our study revealed that performing elective ureteroscopy with an interval of more than 1 week from the onset of renal colic in combination with medical treatments was associated with less need for double-J stent placement, less need for repeated ureteroscopy, and fewer postoperative complications compared to performing elective ureteroscopy in <1 week from the renal colic onset in nonemergent patients with ureteral stone larger than 6 mm. Although the rate of ureteroscopy failure was higher among the patients who underwent ureteroscopy in <1 week from their renal colic initiation, there was no statistically significant relationship between performing ureteroscopy in <1 week and an increased risk for ureteroscopy failure.

Comparison of immediate versus post-stenting ureteroscopy for ureteral stones treatment

Ureteroscopy is a highly effective treatment for ureteral stones, characterized by a high stone-free rate and a low need for re-treatment. Ureteral stent placement can improve the insertion of the ureteral access sheath and ureteroscope but may be associated with higher morbidity prior to and after ureteroscopy. The study aimed to compare immediate versus post-stenting ureteroscopy for ureteral stone treatment in terms of operative time, intra- and post-operative complications, length of hospital stay, and stone-free rate. This prospective study involved 126 patients with ureteral stones divided into two groups: the post-stenting ureteroscopy group (PS-URS), who underwent primary ureteral stenting by double J followed by delayed ureteroscopy, and the immediate ureteroscopy group (I-URS), who underwent immediate ureteroscopy without previous stenting. Sixty-six patients were included in the PS-URS group and 60 patients in the I-URS group. Results were comparable, with no significant differences between both groups. The mean operative time was 33.77±3.51 minutes for the PS-URS group and 34.60±2.01 minutes for the I-URS group. The average length of hospital stay was 0.84±2.55 days for PS-URS and 0.92±1.96 days for I-URS patients. The stone-free rate was 97% in the PS-URS group and 95% in the I-URS group. The overall complication rate was 4.5% versus 5% in the PS-URS and I-URS groups, respectively, with all complications being minor and managed effectively. Immediate ureteroscopy is a safe and relevant operative approach for ureteral stones, with comparative results for post-stenting delayed ureteroscopy.

Primary versus delayed ureteroscopy for ureteric stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:

Ureteric colic is a major clinical and economic burden on the National Health Service. There has been a recent paradigm shift to consider definitive surgery as the primary intervention at the time of initial presentation.

Objective:

To systematically evaluate the outcomes of primary/emergency ureteroscopy versus delayed/elective ureteroscopy.

Methods:

We performed a critical review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials–CENTRAL, CINAHL, Clinicaltrials.gov, Google Scholar and individual urological journals in April 2020. A robust database search was performed using a combination of the terms ‘primary ureteroscopy’, ‘immediate ureteroscopy’, ‘delayed ureteroscopy’ and ‘emergency ureteroscopy’. Adult patients (> 16 years) with ureteric stones presenting as an emergency were included.

Results:

Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria, with 4 studies directly comparing primary/emergency to delayed/elective ureteroscopy for an acute presentation of ureteric colic. Across the studies, 1708 patients underwent primary/emergency ureteroscopy for ureteric calculi and 990 underwent delayed ureteroscopy. No significant differences in stone-free rates were found between both groups with primary/emergency achieving 85% and delayed/elective 91% ( p = 0.68). The majority of stones treated were located in the distal ureter in both groups. Overall, there were no differences in complications between the groups ( p = 0.42) or major complications (0.17). However, there were fewer minor complications in the primary URS group ( p = 0.02). Ureteral catheter or double-J stent insertion was used in 71% of delayed/elective ureteroscopy cases, compared to 46.8% of primary/emergency cases (p = 0.001). For patients undergoing primary/emergency ureteroscopy, 6.4% patients required auxiliary procedures. In the delayed/elective group, 7.6% required further definitive treatment (NS).

Conclusion:

Primary ureteroscopy is a safe and feasible procedure, when performed in suitable patients in the acute setting. It is associated with significantly lower stent usage, equivalent stone clearance, no increase in overall or major complications including sepsis, and fewer minor complications when compared to delayed/elective ureteroscopy. Prospective studies will do well to explore this area further but on current evidence, primary ureteroscopy is the safe procedure.

Level of evidence:

Not applicable

Emergency versus elective ureteroscopy for the management of ureteral stones

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and efficacy of emergency ureteroscopy (URS) compared with elective URS.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent URS for isolated ureteral stones in a single center from October 2001 to February 2014. Our patient cohort was divided into two groups: an emergency URS group (Group A), which consisted of patients who underwent URS within the first 24 h of admission, and an elective or planned URS group (Group B). The URS success rate was defined as being the incidence of successful stone fragmentation and whether there was resolution of renal obstruction.

RESULTS

A total of 2957 patients' medical records were available for analysis. Of these, 704 (21%) comprised of emergency cases and the remaining 2253 (79%) were elective cases. Patients in Group A were younger, had a smaller BMIs, and had smaller stone sizes (p < 0.001). The URS success rate was found to be 97% in Group A and 96% in Group B (p = 0.35). Intraoperative or postoperative complication rates were not found to vary significantly between the groups (8% vs 7%, respectively, p = 0.50). The incidence of ureteral stenting was nearly twice as high if URS was performed during night hours (85% vs 45%, p < 0.001). However, ureteral stenting was more prevalent in Group B compared to Group A patients (57% vs 25%, p < 0.001), possibly as a result of the number of pre-stented patients (73%).

CONCLUSIONS

Emergency URS is an effective and safe option for patients with renal colic. Younger patients without pre-existing obesity and with stone sizes up to 8 mm located in the distal ureter might be a better match for emergency URS.

Comparison of Primary and Delayed Ureteroscopy for Ureteric Stones: A Prospective Non-Randomized Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

Primary ureteroscopy (P-URS) has been shown to be as safe and as efficacious as preoperative stent insertion followed by a delayed ureteroscopy (D-URS). However, studies are of limited patient cohort.

METHODS

A prospective study comparing P-URS and laser fragmentation for ureteric stones to those who received a stent insertion followed by D-URS and stone fragmentation.

RESULTS

A total of 367 consecutive patients were included. P-URS was conducted on 235 patients and D-URS on 132 patients. There was no overall difference between patient or stone demographics between the 2 groups, although there were more proximal ureteric and pelvi-ureteric junction stones in the preoperative stent group. The mean operative times were comparable with a stone free rate of 97 and 94% in the preoperative stent and no-stent groups, respectively. The overall complication rates were comparable.

CONCLUSION

The current study provides evidence for the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of P-URS for ureteric calculi in a publicly funded healthcare setting with results comparable to those patients with a preoperative stent and delayed procedure. Therefore, cumulatively, P-URS could lead to less hospitalization, length of stay, stent-related morbidity, and ultimately will be more cost-effective.

Emergency vs elective ureteroscopy for a single ureteric stone

Objective

To compare emergency with elective ureteroscopy (URS) for the treatment of a single ureteric stone.

Patients and methods

The files of adult patients with a single ureteric stone were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with fever or turbid urine on passage of the guidewire beside the stone underwent ureteric stenting or nephrostomy drainage. Patients who underwent URS were included and divided into two groups: the emergency (EM) Group, those who presented with persistent renal colic and underwent emergency URS within 24 h; and the elective (EL) Group, who underwent elective URS after ≥14 days of diagnosis. Patients with ureteric stents were excluded. The technique for URS was the same in both groups. Safety was defined as absence of complications. Efficacy was defined as the stone-free rate after a single URS session.

Results

From March 2015 to September 2018, 179 patients (107 in the EM Group and 72 in the EL Group) were included. There were significantly more hydronephrosis and smaller stones in the EM Group (P = 0.002 and P = 0.001, respectively). Laser disintegration was needed in more patients in the EL Group (83% vs 68%, P = 0.023). Post-URS ureteric stents were inserted in more patients in the EM Group (91% vs 72%, P = 0.001). Complications were comparable for both groups (4.2% for EL and 5.6% for EM, P = 0.665). Stone-free rates were also comparable (93% in the EL Group and 96% in the EM Group, P = 0.336).

Conclusions

Emergency URS can be as safe and effective as elective URS for the treatment of a single ureteric stone if it is performed in patients without fever or turbid urine.

Abbreviations: EL Group: elective group; EM Group: emergency group; KUB: plain abdominal radiograph of the kidneys, ureters and bladder; MET: medical expulsive therapy; NCCT: non-contrast CT; SFR: stone-free rate; SWL: shockwave lithotripsy; URS: ureteroscopy

Predicting emergency interventions in patients with acute ureteral colic using acute renal colic scoring system in a Pakistani cohort

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the acute renal colic score (ARC) in predicting the need of emergency intervention (EI) in patients with ureteric colic secondary to a ureteral stone.

PATIENT AND METHODS

In an emergency room (ER) of a university hospital, we conducted a prospective cohort study over a period of 6 months. ARC score was calculated using four parameters, i.e., serum creatinine, total white cell count (TLC), stone length and level. Primary outcome measure was EI, which was defined as the need of endourological intervention within 48 h of presentation. ARC was calculated for each patient against the two possible outcomes, i.e., EI vs. no EI. The need of intervention was based on patient-related clinical factors and the decision of the attending urologist.

RESULTS

The study included 132 patients. EI was performed in 85 patients (64.4%). URS was the most common intervention performed in 81 (95.3%) patients, followed by the a insertion of a double J stent in two (2.4%) patients for forniceal rupture and high TLC count and percutaneous nephrostomy in two (2.4%) patients for raised creatinine and TLC. All four variables in ARC score including serum creatinine (p < 0.001), TLC (p < 0.001), stone size (p < 0.001) and stone level (p < 0.001) were found to be significantly associated with need for EI. Using ROC the sensitivity and specificity of the score was 92.9% and 87.5%, respectively, with AUC of 0.93.

CONCLUSIONS

ARC score is highly sensitive and specific in determining the need of EI in patients with uncomplicated ureteric colic within 48 h of initial presentation.