Dataset Information

Changing the double-pigtail stent by a new suture stent to improve patient's quality of life: a prospective study.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Double-pigtail stent intolerance reduces patient's quality of life. By decreasing the amount of material within the bladder, it should be possible to attenuate stent's symptoms. We evaluated the tolerance of a new stent with a dedicated questionnaire.

Methods

The major innovation of the pigtail suture stent (PSS) is in the replacement of the lower part of the double-pigtail stent with a 0.3F suture. A total of 79 consecutive patients agreed to be fitted with a PSS. The double-pigtail stents of 24 patients complaining strongly of symptoms were replaced with PSS (group 1), and 55 other patients were fitted directly with the PSS after an ureteral endoscopic intervention (group 2). The questionnaire was prospectively administered to patients at baseline and Day 15 post-placement.

Results

All questionnaires were returned. In group 1, the replacement of the double-pigtail stent with a PSS significantly decreased urinary symptom scores (35.2 ± 7.5 vs. 23.6 ± 5.4; p = 2 × 10(-6)) and pain scores (11.0 ± 3.9 vs. 4.9 ± 3.1; p = 1 × 10(-7)). In group 1, the baseline scores were not significantly different from those of control group with double-pigtail stent. In group 2, the urinary scores with PSS were significantly different from those of baseline without stent. The scores of the two groups fitted with a PSS were not significantly different at Day 15 post-placement. Unexpectedly, following PSS implantation, we observe a clear dilation of the ureter without inflammation around the suture.

Conclusions

The PSS significantly decreases stent's symptoms and constitutes a medical advance in the domain of ureteral stent tolerance.

SUBMITTER: Vogt B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4512273 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDouble J (DJ) ureteral stents are commonly inserted after ureteroscopy (URS) procedures for stone treatment. However, stent-related symptoms are still a major issue.ObjectiveTo determine whether a commercially available pigtail suture stent (PSS) can reduce stent-related symptoms compared to a conventional DJ stent after uncomplicated URS.Design setting and participantsWe designed a randomized, single-blind, parallel-group trial from January to November 2020. The inclusion criteria were stone-free URS without intraprocedural complications. Patients with distal ureteral stones were excluded.InterventionInsertion of a PSS or DJ stent after URS.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisThe primary endpoint was the Urinary Symptom Index score on the Ureteral Stent Symptoms Questionnaire (USSQ) 2 wk after URS. Secondary endpoints were USSQ domain scores and responses to individual USSQ questions at 2 d and 2 wk after surgery.Results and limitationsA total of 78 patients were randomized and treated according to protocol. The Urinary Symptom Index score (p = 0.004), overall Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score (p = 0.022), and the percentage of patients complaining of pain (63.9% vs 86.1%, p = 0.029) were significantly in favor of PSS at both 2 d and 2 wk after URS. At 2 d, the VAS score among patients with pain (p = 0.025) and the General Health Index score (p = 0.036) were significantly better in the PSS group. No severe complications occurred in either group. Study limitations are the exclusion of patients with distal ureteral stones and the limited sample size.ConclusionsPSS significantly reduced stent-related symptoms after URS, in particular urinary symptoms and pain, compared to conventional DJ stents, and showed a good safety profile.Patient summaryStents are hollow tubes placed in the passage between the kidney and the bladder (ureter). The standard stent has two coiled ends (double J stent) to keep it in place in both the kidney and the bladder. We tested a commercial stent with two strings at the bladder end (pigtail suture stent) after procedures to remove stones from the upper urinary tract and found that it caused less stent-related symptoms compared to a double J stent.  This trial is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03344120.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To assess the health burden of breast hypertrophy and the comparative effectiveness of breast reduction surgery in improving health-related quality of life. DESIGN:Prospective cohort study. SETTING:A major public tertiary care hospital in Australia. PARTICIPANTS:Women with symptomatic breast hypertrophy who underwent breast reduction surgery were followed for 12 months. A comparison control cohort comprised women with breast hypertrophy who did not undergo surgery. INTERVENTIONS:Bilateral breast reduction surgery for women in the surgical cohort. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:The primary outcome measure was health-related quality of life measured preoperatively and at 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively using the Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures included post-surgical complications. RESULTS:209 patients in the surgical cohort completed questionnaires before and after surgery. 124 patients in the control hypertrophy cohort completed baseline and 12-month follow-up questionnaires. At baseline, both groups had significantly lower scores compared with population norms across all scales (p<0.001). In the surgical cohort significant improvements were seen across all eight SF-36 scales (p<0.001) following surgery. Within 3 months of surgery scores were equivalent to those of the normal population and this improvement was sustained at 12 months. SF-36 physical and mental component scores both significantly improved following surgery, with a mean change of 10.2 and 9.2 points, respectively (p<0.001). In contrast, SF-36 scores for breast hypertrophy controls remained at baseline across 12 months. The improvement in quality of life was independent of breast resection weight and body mass index. CONCLUSION:Breast reduction significantly improved quality of life in women with breast hypertrophy. This increase was most pronounced within 3?months of surgery and sustained at 12-month follow-up. This improvement in quality of life is comparable to other widely accepted surgical procedures. Furthermore, women benefit from surgery regardless of factors including body mass index and resection weight.