MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297239805 · doi:10.4081/aiua.2022.3.305

Management of encrusted ureteral stents: Two center experience

2022· review· en· W4297239805 on OpenAlexaff
M. Thangavelu, Mohamed Yehia Abdallah, Olubenga John Isola, Ahmed Kotb

Bibliographic record

VenueArchivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Canadian institutionsNOSM UniversityThunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUreteroscopyUreterPercutaneous nephrolithotomyStentSurgeryLithotripsyNephrostomyRenal colicPercutaneous

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: We present our experience of the endourological management of encrusted ureteral stents (EUS) and a literature review on forgotten encrusted ureteral stents. METHODS: A total of 13 encrusted ureteral stents from 12 patients were removed in two hospitals. The medical records were retrospectively analyzed for stent indication, indwelling time, clinical presentation, investigations, type and the number of surgical procedures, operative time, complications, duration of hospital stay, and the follow-up. RESULTS: Five ureteral stents (US) inserted before ESWL (extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy) for renal stones, seven US for ureteric stones with ureteric colic, and one ureteral stent for post ureteroscopy procedure. The mean indwelling time was 15.07 ± 7.34 months with a range from 6 to 24 months. The mean Kidney,Ureter and Bladder (KUB) score of encrusta-tion grading was 11.84 ± 2.07 with a range from 9 to 15. The encrusted stents were removed by a combination of cystolithotripsy, semi-rigid ureteroscopy (URS), retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), and ESWL. The average total number of procedures to remove one EUS was 3 ± 1.08 with a range of 2 to 5 proce-dures. Six encrusted stents were removed in one, five stents required two, one stent required three and one stent required four hospital admissions. The median operative time was 210 minutes with a range of 60 to 660 minutes per EUS removal and the mean hospital stay was 2.69 ± 1.43 days with a range of 1 to 6 days. All patients had successful removal of encrusted stent and complete stone clearance with no major complica-tions. In the follow-up, one patient had recurrent ureteric stone, one patient on regular stent exchange due to poor renal function and one patient developed significant ureteric stricture referred for reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS: Removal of forgotten encrusted impacted ureteral stents is challenging and requires a multimodal surgical approach. It adds significant costs to the health care system and in addition it affects patient safety and quality of life. Patient education, avoiding unnecessary ureteral stent place-ment and a computerized stent monitoring system reduces the incidence of forgotten ureteral stents and their complications.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchivio Italiano di Urologia e AndrologiaSame topicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207