Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/17279
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHennessey, Derek B-
dc.contributor.authorKinnear, Ned J-
dc.contributor.authorEvans, R M-
dc.contributor.authorHagan, C-
dc.contributor.authorThwaini, A-
dc.date2017-
dc.date.accessioned2018-03-22T23:32:11Z-
dc.date.available2018-03-22T23:32:11Z-
dc.date.issued2017-06-
dc.identifier.citationInternational urology and nephrology 2017; 49(6): 931-936-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/17279-
dc.description.abstractPlacement of an antegrade double-J (JJ) ureteric stent is an important component of pyeloplasty. Correct siting of distal end of the stent in the bladder is essential for ease of removal. To date, no studies have compared methods for confirming stent position. This study aims to address that void in the literature. Eligible patients underwent laparoscopic pyeloplasty with antegrade stent placement at our institution from 2007 to 2015 inclusive. Methods to verify distal stent position of rigid cystoscopy, artificial bladder filling or no confirmation were compared. Effectiveness was determined by the proportion of malpositioned stents detected intra-operatively compared to the total found malpositioned, both intra-operatively and during follow-up. A total of 75 patients underwent laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Forty-six (61.3%) patients had distal stent position assessed intra-operatively, comprising 27 by cystoscopy and 19 by artificial bladder filling, while for 29 (38.7%) patients no verification method was used. Cystoscopy, artificial bladder filling and no confirmation detected intra-operatively 2, 1 and 0 malpositioned stents, from malpositioned stent totals of 2, 2 and 1, respectively. Malposition of JJ ureteric stent is uncommon, and omitting intra-operative position verification appears reasonable in select cases. Artificial bladder filling can help detect malpositioned JJ stents without repositioning the patient for cystoscopy. However, our results suggest both may be unreliable. If stent malposition is suspected, certainty is desired or extended operative duration is less critical, then the surgeon should proceed with cystoscopy.-
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.subjectAntegrade JJ stent-
dc.subjectArtificial bladder filling-
dc.subjectLaparoscopic pyeloplasty-
dc.subjectPUJ obstruction-
dc.titleIs confirmation of ureteric stent placement in laparoscopic pyeloplasty necessary?-
dc.typeJournal Article-
dc.identifier.journaltitleInternational urology and nephrology-
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Urology, Belfast City Hospital, Lisburn Road, Belfast, UK-
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Urology, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia-
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s11255-017-1560-8-
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-7833-2537-
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-7372-0100-
dc.identifier.pubmedid28260225-
dc.type.austinJournal Article-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.openairetypeJournal Article-
Appears in Collections:Journal articles
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

6
checked on Mar 28, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.