Skip to main content
Log in

Semirigid ureteroscopy: the effect of previous ipsilateral intraureteral manipulations on stone clearance

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Urological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We investigated whether previous intraureteral manipulations had an effect on the stone-free rates (SFR) after semi-rigid ureteroscopy (URS) with pneumatic lithotripsy. A retrospective review of all patients who were treated for ureteral stones at two different institutions from June 2003 through January 2010 was performed. Data of 161 URS procedures were analyzed. Stone size, location (distal, mid and proximal) and number (single and multiple), patient demographics and previous intraureteral manipulations were recorded. Patients were grouped as having undergone a previous ipsilateral intraureteral manipulation (Group 1) or not (Group 2). Stone location and number, stone clearance and ancillary procedures were compared. There were no significant differences between Group 1 versus Group 2 for age (p > 0.05), gender (p > 0.05), stone site (p > 0.05) and stone size (p > 0.05). Stones with multiple locations were more frequent in Group 1 (18.5%); however, the difference did not reach statistical significance between the two groups. Similarly, the frequency of multiple stones was also higher in Group 1 (29.6%). Stone site, diameter and gender were comparable in both groups. Stone-free rate of all patients was 84.6% after the first intervention. This rate increased to 98.1% after secondary procedures. Univariate analysis revealed that SFR after URS were low in patients who underwent previous intraureteral manipulations (Group 1:55.6% vs. Group 2:89.1%). SFR after the first intervention were related with stone size, location and number. Additionally, multiple logistic regression analysis indicated a relationship between previous intraureteral manipulations and initial stone clearance rates. Spontaneous passage of stone fragments after URS was associated with stone burden, location, number and previous intraureteral manipulations. Further multiple logistic regression analysis showed that only previous intraureteral manipulations were associated with the expulsion of the stones left for passage.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Preminger GM, Tiselius H-G, Assimos DG, Alken P, Buck AC, Gallucci M et al (2007) 2007 Guideline for the management of ureteral calculi. Eur Urol 52(6):1610–1631

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Yencilek F, Sarica K, Erturhan S, Yagci F, Erbagci A (2010) Treatment of ureteral calculi with semirigid ureteroscopy: where should we stop? Urol Int 84(3):260–264

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Anagnostou T, Tolley D (2004) Management of ureteric stones. Eur Urol 45(6):714–721

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Sözen S, Küpeli B, Tunc L, Senocak C, Alkibay T, Karaoğlan U et al (2003) Management of ureteral stones with pneumatic lithotripsy: report of 500 patients. J Endourol 17(9):721–724

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hamano S, Nomura H, Kinsui H, Oikawa T, Suzuki N, Tanaka M et al (2000) Experience with ureteral stone management in 1, 082 patients using semirigid ureteroscopes. Urol Int 65(2):106–111

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Tiselius H-G (2005) Removal of ureteral stones with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopic procedures. What can we learn from the literature in terms of results and treatment efforts? Urol Res 33(3):185–190

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hong YK, Park DS (2009) Ureteroscopic lithotripsy using Swiss Lithoclast for treatment of ureteral calculi: 12-years experience. J Korean Med Sci 24(4):690–694

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ather MH, Nazim SM, Sulaiman MN (2009) Efficacy of semirigid ureteroscopy with pneumatic lithotripsy for ureteral stone surface area of greater than 30 mm2. J Endourol 23(4):619–622

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Shields JM, Bird VG, Graves R, Gómez-Marín O (2009) Impact of preoperative ureteral stenting on outcome of ureteroscopic treatment for urinary lithiasis. J Urol 182(6):2768–2774

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rubenstein RA, Zhao LC, Loeb S, Shore DM, Nadler RB (2007) Prestenting improves ureteroscopic stone-free rates. J Endourol 21(11):1277–1280

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Siegel C (2002) Relationship of spontaneous passage of ureteral calculi to stone size and location as revealed by unenhanced helical CT. J Urol 168(4 Pt 1):1644

    Google Scholar 

  12. Coll DM, Varanelli MJ, Smith RC (2002) Relationship of spontaneous passage of ureteral calculi to stone size and location as revealed by unenhanced helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 178(1):101–103

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zafer Tandogdu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kurtulus, F.O., Avcı, E., Tandogdu, Z. et al. Semirigid ureteroscopy: the effect of previous ipsilateral intraureteral manipulations on stone clearance. Urol Res 40, 365–371 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-011-0419-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-011-0419-1

Keywords

Navigation