Is the Liberal Use of Double-J Ureteral Stents Justified for Outpatient Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy?
The liberal use of double-J ureteral stents has been encouraged at the Bay Area Renal Stone Center in an effort to prevent complications and avoid hospitalizations and auxiliary procedures following extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL*) utilizing a Dornier HM3 lithotripter. The rationale for the frequent use of double-J stents resulted from several factors. When this outpatient ESWL center opened, ESWL generally was considered an inpatient procedure. The large number (90) of treating urologists initially had limited experience in ESWL. The Stone Center serviced a large geographic area (radius 150 miles) with a significant number of patients requiring substantial travel time following the shock wave procedure.
Seven hundred eighty-three consecutive patients with an adequate three-month follow-up were retrospectively evaluated. Forty-four percent of the patients required double-J stent insertion prior to the ESWL date for a variety of reasons (i.e., colic, obstruction, or urosepsis). Twenty-eight percent of patients had stents inserted immediately prior to the ESWL with an additional 8% requiring ureteral catheters for stone manipulation or for improved visualization of stones.
Of patients with stents, 2.6% required parenteral injections of pain medications post ESWL. The post-ESWL hospitalization rate of patients with stents was only 4.3%, and the post-ESWL auxiliary procedure rate was 1.7%. Retreatment was required in 3.8% of patients.
In this series, and with the outpatient approach to treatment, the liberal use of double-J ureteral stents appears to have been justified. The disadvantages of stents and future considerations of their prior use also are discussed.
KeywordsShock Wave Shock Wave Lithotripsy Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy Ureteral Stone Ureteral Stents
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Chaussy CG and Schmiedt E: Shock wave treatment for stones in the upper urinary tract. Urol Clin NAm 10: 743, 1983.Google Scholar
- 5.Riehle RA: Selective use of ureteral stents before extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Urol Clin N Am 3: 499, 1988.Google Scholar
- 6.Fuchs G, Chaussy C, Riehle RA: Treatment of ureteral stones. In Riehle RA, Newman RC (eds): Principles ofExtracorporeal ShockWave Lithotripsy. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1987.Google Scholar
- 12.Saltzman B: Ureteral stents, indications, variations, and complications. Urol Clin N Am 14: 481, 1988.Google Scholar
- 13.Shabsigh R, Gleeson MJ, Griffith DP: The benefits of stenting on a more-or-less routine basis prior to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Urol Clin N Am 15: 493, 1988.Google Scholar
- 15.Rassweiler J, Schmidt A, Bub P, et al: The role of ESWL for ureteric stone. In Coptcoat MJ, Miller RA, Wickham JEA (eds): Lithotripsy II. London: BDI Publishing, 1987.Google Scholar