Analysis of uroseptic shock after ureteroscopy for ureteral calculi during pregnancy: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Uroseptic shock secondary to ureteral calculi during pregnancy is rare. It is characterized by rapid onset, rapid progression, aggressive disease, limited treatment, poor prognosis, and a mortality rate higher than 20% with improper or delayed management. A clear diagnosis is made based on typical clinical symptoms and abdominal ultrasound, often requiring combined multidisciplinary treatment and the simultaneous release of the obstruction. The high mortality rate is mainly related to inappropriate early treatment of stones and infections or failure to intervene in a timely manner. CASE PRESENTATION: A 21-year-old first-time pregnant patient with uroseptic shock was admitted to our intensive care unit. The patient was successfully treated at our hospital with multidisciplinary cooperation, high-dose vasoactive drugs, IABP, CRRT, VA-ECMO, and termination of pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Timely relief of obstructions, termination of pregnancy, and the provision of IABP, CRRT, and VA-ECMO when necessary in critically ill patients with uroseptic shock during pregnancy can improve the success rate of resuscitation.

[Diagnosis and treatment of four cases of asymptomatic and non-hydrous ureteral calculi].

This paper analyzed the clinical data, diagnosis and treatment of 4 asymptomatic patients with ureteral calculi without hydrops in our hospital from October 2018 to January 2019, and comprehensively discussed the previous literature. The 4 patients in this group had no obvious clinical symptoms, no positive stones were found in the B-ultrasound of the urinary system, and no hydroureter and hydroureter of the affected side was found. Urinary CT scan confirmed ureteral stones. They were all located in the lower ureter, and the stones obstructed the lumen. The stones were round and smooth, and there was no obvious hyperplasia and edema in the surrounding mucosa. The lithotripsy was completed in the first-stage operation, and the DJ catheter was left behind for one month after the operation. Based on the clinical diagnosis and treatment process of the 4 cases of asymptomatic calculi in this group and the analysis of previous studies, these patients were mostly detected by imaging examinations or other systematic imaging examinations during the regular review of urinary calculi. Ureteral stones with obstruction did not necessarily have stone-related symptoms. The onset of renal colic involved an increase in intraluminal pressure, related stimulation of nerve endings, smooth muscle spasms caused by stretching of the ureteral wall, and systemic changes in cytokines and related hormones. Cascade reactions, etc., were associated with the movement of stones down. Ureteral stones without hydrops were mostly located in the lower ureter, which had a certain buffering effect on obstructive pressure. Asymptomatic ureteral calculi could also induce irreversible damage to renal function, and the proportion of damage increased with the diameter of the stone. Patients with a history of urinary calculi, especially those with asymptomatic stones for the first time, should be paid attention to during clinical follow-up. At present, there are few research reports on asymptomatic and non-accumulating ureteral calculi. We analyze the clinical diagnosis and treatment process and characteristics of this group of patients combined with previous literature to provide a reference for the diagnosis and treatment of such patients.

2022 Recommendations of the AFU Lithiasis Committee: Ureteroscopy and ureterorenoscopy.

Technical advances, including miniaturization, have improved the deflection and optical performance of the ureteroscopes, and the availability of dedicated disposable devices have led to their increasing use for kidney and ureteral stone management. Ureterorenoscopy brings diagnostic evidence through the endoscopic description of stones and renal papillary abnormalities. Currently, intracorporeal lithotripsy during ureterorenoscopy is based on laser sources. Routine ureteral stenting is not necessary before ureterorenoscopy, especially because preoperative stenting for>30 days is considered as an independent risk factor of infection. Ureteral access sheaths allow the easy and repeated access to the upper urinary tract and thus facilitate ureterorenoscopy. Their use improves vision, decreases intrarenal pressure, and possibly reduces the operative time, but they may cause ureteral injury. METHODOLOGY: These recommendations were developed using two methods: the Clinical Practice Recommendation (CPR) method and the ADAPTE method, depending on whether or not the question was considered in the European Association of Urology (EAU) recommendations (https://uroweb.org/guidelines/urolithiasis [EAU 2022]) and their adaptability to the French context.

Which Patients Should Have Early Surgical Intervention for Acute Ureteral Colic?

PURPOSE: Early surgical intervention is an attractive option for acute ureteral colic but existing evidence does not clarify which patients benefit. We compared treatment failure rates in patients receiving early intervention and patients offered spontaneous passage to identify subgroups that benefit from early intervention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used administrative data and structured chart review to study consecutive patients attending 9 emergency departments in 2 Canadian provinces with confirmed 2.0 to 9.9 mm ureteral stones. We described patient, stone and treatment characteristics, and performed multivariable regression to identify factors associated with treatment failure, defined as intervention or hospitalization within 60 days. Our secondary outcome was emergency department revisit rate. RESULTS: Overall 1,168 of 3,081 patients underwent early intervention. Those with stones smaller than 5 mm experienced more treatment failures (31.5% vs 9.9%, difference 21.6%, 95% CI 16.9 to 21.2) and emergency department revisits (38.5% vs 19.7%, difference 18.8%, 95% CI 13.8 to 23.8) with early intervention than with spontaneous passage. Patients with stones 7.0 mm or larger experienced fewer treatment failures (34.7% vs 58.6%, risk difference 23.9%, 95% CI 11.3 to 36.6) and similar emergency department revisit rates with early intervention. Patients with 5.0 to 6.9 mm stones had fewer treatment failures with intervention (37.4% vs 55.5%, risk difference 18.1%, 95% CI 7.1 to 28.9) if stones were in the proximal or middle ureter. CONCLUSIONS: Early intervention improves outcomes for patients with large (greater than 7 mm) ureteral stones or 5 to 7 mm proximal or mid ureteral stones. Early intervention may increase morbidity for patients with stones smaller than 5 mm. These findings could help inform future guidelines.

Value of early second session shock wave lithotripsy in treatment of upper ureteric stones compared to laser ureteroscopy.

PURPOSE: The safety and efficacy of early second session shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) compared with laser ureteroscopy (URS) for the treatment of upper ureteric stones were evaluated. METHODS: From January to October 2019, 108 patients with upper ureteric stones (< 1.5 cm and ≤ 1000 Hounsfield unit (HU)) were randomized into SWL and laser URS groups. The second SWL session was performed within 48-72 h of the first session. Using plain abdominal X-ray and ultrasonography, patients were evaluated 48-72 h after the first SWL session and one week after the second and third SWL sessions or one week after URS. The procedure was considered a success when no additional procedures were needed to clear the stone. To determine the stone-free rate (SFR), noncontrast computed tomography of the urinary tract was performed three months postoperatively. RESULTS: In the SWL group, the success rates were 92.6% and 94.4% after the second and third sessions. The SFR was 96.2% in the laser URS group. The success rates were not significantly different between the second and third SWL sessions versus the laser URS (p = 0.418 and 0.660, respectively). Operative and fluoroscopy times were significantly longer in the SWL group (p = 0.001), and JJ stent insertions were needed after laser URS. CONCLUSION: Ultraslow full-power SWL treatment of patients with upper ureteric stones (< 1.5 cm and ≤ 1000 HU) with an early second session is safe and effective compared to laser URS. Patients who do not respond to early second SWL session should be shifted to another treatment modality.

Artificial intelligence in stone disease.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Artificial intelligence (AI) is the ability of a machine, or computer, to simulate intelligent behavior. In medicine, the use of large datasets enables a computer to learn how to perform cognitive tasks, thereby facilitating medical decision-making. This review aims to describe advancements in AI in stone disease to improve diagnostic accuracy in determining stone composition, to predict outcomes of surgical procedures or watchful waiting and ultimately to optimize treatment choices for patients. RECENT FINDINGS: AI algorithms show high accuracy in different realms including stone detection and in the prediction of surgical outcomes. There are machine learning algorithms for outcomes after percutaneous nephrolithotomy, extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, and for ureteral stone passage. Some of these algorithms show better predictive capabilities compared to existing scoring systems and nomograms. SUMMARY: The use of AI can facilitate the development of diagnostic and treatment algorithms in patients with stone disease. Although the generalizability and external validity of these algorithms remain uncertain, the development of highly accurate AI-based tools may enable the urologist to provide more customized patient care and superior outcomes.

The prospective evaluation of the effectiveness of scoring systems in the emergency department in cases with suspected ureteral stones: STONE? CHOKAI?

INTRODUCTION: This study evaluates the effectiveness of CHOKAI and STONE scores in patients presenting to the emergency department with ureteral stones. METHODS: Patients over the age of 18 who were admitted to the emergency department with flank pain, groin pain, scrotal pain, and hematuria and who were performed non-contrast abdominal computed tomography (CT) for diagnostic imaging were included. The numeric pain, CHOKAI, and STONE scores of the patients were calculated. The effectiveness of these scoring systems in the presence of stones was examined. RESULTS: A total of 105 patients were included in the study. In the analysis performed to investigate whether there was a difference between the numeric pain, STONE, and CHOKAI scores in terms of the presence of stones on CT, it was seen that the CHOKAI score was significantly different from the others (p < 0.001). A significant positive correlation was found between the CHOKAI score and stone size (r = 0.343, p < 0.001).When the cut-off value of the CHOKAI score was >7, the sensitivity was found to be 60.49%, and specificity was 83.33%. The cut-off value for the STONE score was >8 with a sensitivity of 70.37% and specificity of 58.33%. The corresponding area under curve values for the CHOHAI and STONE scores was 0.788 (p < 0.0001) and 0.615 (p = 0.087). Male sex, the CHOKAI, and STONE scores were the independent risk factors for ureteral stone. A significant positive correlation was found between the CHOKAI score and stone size (r = 0.343, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The CHOKAI score has a higher performance than the STONE score in detecting the presence of ureteral stones. NEW KNOWLEDGE ADDED BY THIS STUDY: The CHOKAI score has a higher performance than the STONE score in detecting the presence of ureteral stones. Especially in countries such as Turkey, where there are no specific racial differences, the STONE score may be diagnostically insufficient. The CHOKAI score shows the presence of the patient's stone and positively correlates with the size of the stone and the stone location. IMPLICATION FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE OR POLICY: In the functioning of the emergency department, it is important to make the differential diagnosis of patients quickly and provide effective treatment. The use of diagnostic scoring systems saves time for the emergency physician in the differential diagnosis phase and guides in terms of applying for possible additional imaging methods.

Clinical differentiation between acute renal infarction and acute ureteral stone in the emergency department: A single-center retrospective case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have compared renal infarction (RI) and ureteral stone (US), so there is insufficient evidence for emergency clinicians (ECs) to quickly suspect RI during the first assessment. Therefore, we compared the initial clinical presentation and laboratory findings of these diseases in the emergency department (ED) to determine a factor that may indicate RI. METHODS: This single-center retrospective case-control study included 42 patients with acute RI and 210 with US who visited the ED from 2014 to 2020. Medical record data from first ED arrival were investigated, and clinical presentations, blood and urine test results obtained in the ED were compared and analyzed using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: ECs never suspected the initial diagnosis of RI as RI. The most common initial diagnosis was US (40.5%). Among patients with US, 150 patients (71.4%) were suspected of having US (p < 0.001). Abdominal pain (61.9%) was the most common chief complaint in the RI group, and flank pain (73.8%) was the most common in the US group (p < 0.001). 27 factors showed significant differences between the groups. Among those, age ≥ 70 years (odds ratio [OR]: 311.2, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.0-47,833.1), history of A-fib (OR: 149872.8, 95% CI: 289.4-7.8E+07), fever ≥37.5 °C (OR: 297.3, 95% CI: 3.3-27,117.8), Cl- ≤ 103 mEq/L (OR: 9.0, 95% CI: 1.0-80.1), albumin ≤4.3 g/dL (OR: 26.6, 95% CI: 2.1-330.3), LDH ≥500 IU/L (OR: 17.9, 95% CI: 1.8-182.5), and CRP ≥0.23 mg/dL (OR: 7.5, 95% CI: 1.1-52.3) showed significantly high ORs, whereas urine RBCs (OR: 0, 95% CI: 0-0.02) showed a low OR (p < 0.05). The regression model showed good calibration (chi-square: 6.531, p = 0.588) and good discrimination (area under the curve = 0.9913). CONCLUSIONS: When differentiating acute RI from US in the ED, age ≥ 70 years, history of A-fib, fever ≥37.5 °C, LDH ≥500 IU/L, Cl- ≤ 103 mEq/L, albumin ≤4.3 g/dL, CRP ≥0.23 mg/dL and negative urine RBC result suggest the possibility of RI.

Evaluation of the patients with flank pain in the emergency department by modified STONE score.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Computed tomography (CT) is generally used for ureteral stone diagnosis. Unnecessary imaging use should be reduced to prevent increased radiation exposure and lower costs. For this reason, scoring systems that evaluate the risk of ureteral stones have been developed. In this study, we aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of the modified STONE score (MSS) and its ability to predict ureteral stones. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The research was conducted as a multi-center, prospective and observational study. Patients aged 18 and over who presented to EDs with complaints of flank pain and who received a CT were included. Patients were divided into two groups based on the presence or absence of stones, and the categories of the MSS were determined. The ability of the MSS to predict the ureteral stone and its diagnostic accuracy were calculated. RESULTS: The median age (min/max) of the 367 study patients was 37 (18/91), and 244 (66.5%) were male. A ureteral stone was present in 228 (73.0%) patients. Male gender, previous stone history, duration of pain less than 6 h, presence of hematuria, and CRP value below 0.5 mg/dL were significantly more common in the group with stones. The prevalence of ureter stones in the MSS high-risk group was 96.0%. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and sensitivity of the MSS was 0.903 and 0.81, respectively. CONCLUSION: The modified STONE score has high diagnostic performance in suspected urinary stone cases. This scoring system can assist clinicians with radiation reducing decision-making.

The Effect of Shock Wave Lithotripsy on Male and Female Sexual Dysfunction in Patients with Proximal Ureteral Stones.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to investigate the effects of shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) treatment for proximal ureteral stones on the sexual functions of patients of both genders. METHODS: In this prospective study, 30 female and 72 male patients who had received SWL treatment for proximal ureteral stones in our clinic between August 2019 and October 2020 were evaluated. CT, creatinine, urinary analysis, and culture were performed during the initial consultation for all patients. Information regarding the age, BMI, and stone burden of the patients was recorded. Male patients answered the International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5) questionnaire, and female participants answered the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) 3 times: pre-procedural and post-procedural first and third month. CT was repeated on the first month, and any residues were noted. RESULTS: The mean IIEF-5 scores of the male patients were 23.11 ± 8.11 prior to surgery, and it decreased to 19.74 ± 7.65 in the first month and 23.88 ± 9.23 in the third, p = 0.001. The mean FSFI scores of female patients were 18.2 ± 9.9, which decreased to 12.8 ± 6.12 in the first month and 17.8 ± 8.66 in the third, p = 0.001. Univariate analysis revealed that the patients' age (male: p = 0.004 and female: p = 0.008) and BMI (male: p = 0.044 and female: p = 0.027) were related to the poorer scores for both genders. However, there were not any significant findings regarding stone burden (male: p = 0.054 and female: p = 0.078). CONCLUSIONS: The possibility of developing temporary sexual dysfunction should be taken into account for patients who are candidates for SWL treatment. As the patient's age and BMI increase, SWL-related sexual dysfunction becomes more severe.

Sonographic twinkling artifact for diagnosis of acute ureteral calculus.

OBJECTIVE: We compared the performance of color Doppler twinkling artifacts with B-ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) for diagnosis of ureteral calculus in patients with acute renal colic. METHODS: The location and size of ureteral stones in 2268 patients with acute renal colic were determined using the two ultrasound methods and CT. All cases were followed up for 2-8 weeks. RESULTS: Color Doppler twinkling artifacts had a sensitivity of 96.98%, specificity of 90.39%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 99.77%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 41.23%. B-Ultrasound had a sensitivity of 96.39%, specificity of 80.77%, PPV of 99.53%, and NPV of 34.43%. CT had a sensitivity of 99.59%, specificity of 94.23%, PPV of 99.86%, and NPV of 84.48%. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.925 for color Doppler twinkling artifacts, 0.863 for B-ultrasound, and 0.963 for CT. CONCLUSION: For the diagnosis of ureteral calculus, the sonographic twinkling artifact had a similar performance as CT. We suggest use of the sonographic twinkling artifact instead of CT for patients with acute renal colic to reduce the examination time and exposure to radiation, and to provide earlier access to treatment.

External validation of the CHOKAI score for the prediction of ureteral stones: A multicenter prospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE: The CHOKAI and STONE scores are clinical prediction rules to predict ureteral stones in patients presenting with renal colic. Both systems contribute to reducing diagnostic radiation exposure; however, few studies have compared the two scoring systems. Therefore, we aimed to compare these systems and assess their diagnostic accuracy for ureteral stones. METHODS: This was a multicenter prospective observational study performed between 2017 and 2018, including patients aged >15 years with renal colic and suspected with ureteral stones. We calculated the CHOKAI and STONE scores of each patient based on their medical interviews and physical and laboratory findings. Primary outcome was differences in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve in each model, and secondary outcome was diagnostic accuracy at the optimal cut-off point. RESULTS: Of the 124 patients included, 84 were diagnosed with ureteral stones. The area under the curve of the CHOKAI score was 0.95, showing a sensitivity of 0.93, specificity of 0.90, positive likelihood ratio of 9.3, and negative likelihood ratio of 0.079, at an optimal cut-off point of 6. The area under the curve of the STONE score was 0.88, showing a sensitivity of 0.68, specificity of 0.90, positive likelihood ratio of 6.8, and negative likelihood ratio of 0.36, at an optimal cut-off point of 9. Thus, the area under the curve was significantly higher for the CHOKAI score than for the STONE score (p = 0.0028). CONCLUSIONS: The CHOKAI score has a diagnostic performance superior to that of the STONE score in this population.

[Overview of ureteral stone management]. / Prise en charge de la lithiase urétérale.

Ureteral stones are a major health concern with a worldwide rising prevalence. In countries with a high standard of living, the prevalence urolithiasis is notably high with over 10%. Ureteral stones formed in the kidney and then descending the ureter commonly manifest themselves as renal colic. The treatment of ureteral stones includes conservative treatment, medical expulsion therapy, interventional stone treatment such as ureteral stenting, ureteroscopy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy as well as (oral) chemolysis in selected cases. This article presents a comprehensive overview on the treatment of ureteral stones and an outlook on advancements in treatment.

La maladie lithiasique est un problème de santé majeur en augmentation. Dans les pays industrialisés, la prévalence de la maladie lithiasique est particulièrement élevée, plus de 10 %. Les lithiases sont formées dans le rein, puis elles migrent dans l'uretère où elles se manifestent couramment par des coliques néphrétiques. La prise en charge des lithiases urétérales comprend les traitements conservateur, médical expulsif, interventionnels comme la pose de stent urétéral, l'urétéroscopie ou la lithotripsie extracorporelle, ainsi que la chimiolyse orale dans certains cas. Cet article présente un résumé de la prise en charge de la lithiase urétérale ainsi que les progrès réalisés en matière de traitement.

'Negative Ureteroscopy' for Stone Disease: Evidence from a Systematic Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: While ureteroscopy (URS) is a common procedure for ureteric stones, this window between diagnosis and treatment leaves the possibility for a 'negative', 'stoneless' or 'diagnostic' URS. We perform a systematic review to look at the rate of 'negative ureteroscopy' and risk factors associated with it. RECENT FINDINGS: From a total of 3599 articles and 68 abstracts, 4 studies (1336 patients) were selected. The negative URS rate varied from 4 to 14%. Common predictors seem to be female gender, small stones, radiolucent stones and distal ureteric stones. Although infrequent, negative ureteroscopy should be avoided in patients with ureteric stones by performing a low-dose CT scan on the day of surgery. This should especially be performed for females and those with smaller, radiolucent or distal ureteric stones.

Practice patterns of ureteral access sheath during ureteroscopy for nephrolithiasis: a survey among endourologists worldwide.

BACKGROUND: The use of ureteral access sheath (UAS) during ureteroscopy is controversial. We aimed to explore practice patterns of UAS during ureteroscopy for nephrolithiasis among endourologists worldwide. METHODS: A 15-question survey was designed using the SurveyMonkey® platform. The questions covered the background and professional experience of the potential respondents, indications for UAS insertion, UAS caliber and possible complications associated with its use. The questions were anonymously tabulated in order to determine practice patterns of UAS during ureteroscopy for nephrolithiasis among endourologists. The survey was then distributed via e-mail to all the Endourological Society members. RESULTS: 216 members responded. 99.53% of the respondents practice as endourologists, 63.4% are fellowship trained and 74.4% are at least 6 years post-fellow. 73.2% practice in an academic facility. 77.3% perform at least 100 ureteroscopies annually. 46 and 76% routinely use UAS for the treatment of ureteral and kidney stones, respectively. In both cases, the 12/14 access sheath is the most common. 42% use UAS in primary ureteroscopy. 90.3% believe that a double J stent insertion is not mandatory prior to UAS insertion. 79.1% think the use of UAS does not increase postoperative complications rate, and if the latter does encounter, then most likely it is either a ureteral stricture (93.2%) or pain (48%). CONCLUSIONS: UAS is commonly used by highly skilled endourologists during ureteroscopy. 12/14 UAS is mostly used. Ureteral stricture and post-operative pain are proposed as possible complications following UAS introduction, however pre-stenting is not mandatory as overall low complication rate is expected.

Management and outcome of obstructive ureteral stones in the emergency department: Emphasis on urine tests and antibiotics usage.

BACKGROUND: Kidney stone related complaints in the Emergency Department (ED) are common. Current guidelines recommend antibiotic therapy for infected obstructive stones and stone removal in a timely fashion, but there is no clear recommendation for prophylactic antibiotic use for bacteriuria or pyuria in the setting of obstructive ureteral stones. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to evaluate the current management of patients with obstructive ureteral stones in a single ED with emphasis on urine tests and antibiotics use. METHODS: The picture archiving and communication system (PACS) was used to filter the list of patients who received a computed tomography (CT) scan of the abdomen and pelvis that positively identified obstructive ureteral stones. Demographics and clinical data were also recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: Of the patients discharged, 278 patients did not receive antibiotics in the ED or a prescription. Of these, 8 patients had positive culture, 4 patients followed up, and one developed and was treated for a urinary-tract infection. One hundred ninety two patients were not given antibiotics in the ED but received an antibiotics prescription, and 4 patients had positive cultures grow. Two followed up and had no infection-related complications. Fourteen patients were discharged without a prescription after receiving a single dose of antibiotics in the ED, with no positive urine cultures and 9 patients following up without complication. CONCLUSION: Antibiotics were given at the discretion of the provider without clear pattern. A high rate of infectious complication did not occur in the followed up patient group.

Medical Expulsive Therapy for Symptomatic Distal Ureter Stones: Is the Combination of Bromelain and Tamsulosin More Effective than Tamsulosin Alone? Preliminary Results of a Single-Center Study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and efficacy of bromelain plus tamsulosin versus tamsulosin alone as medical expulsive therapy (MET) for promoting spontaneous stone passage (SSP) of symptomatic distal ureter stones. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One-hundred-fourteen patients with a 4-10 mm distal ureteral stone were enrolled (Group A). Patients self-administered daily bromelain with tamsulosin for 30 days or until SSP or intervention was mandatory. Patients were compared to those from a control group taking tamsulosin as MET (Group B) and matched for the following factors: sex, age ±10%, stone diameter. A logistic regression model evaluated bromelain and the ureteral stone diameter as explanatory variables. RESULTS: SSP rates were 87.7 vs. 75.4% for group A vs. group B respectively (p = 0.016); with no difference observed for the time to self-reported stone expulsion (11.68 vs. 11.57 days; p = 0.91). Considering larger stones (> 5 mm), the SSP rate was 83.3% in group A and 61% in group B (p < 0.01). With each millimeter increment of stone diameter, the probability of SSP decreased by 59.1% (p < 0.0001), while it increased of 3.3 when bromelain was present. Only 3 cases of tamsulosin-related adverse events were recorded. CONCLUSION: The association of bromelain and tamsulosin as MET increases the probability of SSP of symptomatic distal ureteral stones, with no bromelain-related side effects recorded.

Predictors of Hospitalization After Ureteroscopy Plus Elective Double-J Stent as an Outpatient Procedure.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and feasibility of ureteroscopy plus elective double-J stent as an outpatient procedure in an unselected population with regard to the treatment for ureteral calculi and to present a multivariate analysis of factors predict hospitalization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ureteroscopy was performed as an outpatient procedure on 308 consecutive patients with ureteral stones. Contraindication for day case surgery was the only exclusion criteria from the study. All causes that led to immediate hospitalization were recorded; at the same time, all causes of hospitalization that occurred within 72 h from the procedure were also recorded and included in the final analysis. RESULTS: The overall stone-free rate and the rate of hospitalization were 94.5 and 9.7% respectively. Intraoperative complications were observed in 16 patients (5.1%). In terms of the variables related to hospitalization, the univariate analysis showed a statistical significant association between the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (p < 0.001) and operative time (p = 0.018). At multivariate analysis, the only independent factor predictor of hospitalization was the ASA score (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, semirigid ureteroscopy is a safe and effective treatment that is independent of intraoperative local conditions or stone size. Elective Double-J stenting avoids major complications as the first reason for hospitalization. We suggest that ASA score > 2 should be taken into account when ureterorenoscopy is planning as an outpatient procedure.

Risk Factors for Ureteral Damage in Ureteroscopic stone Treatment: Results of the German Prospective Multicentre Benchmarks of Ureterorenoscopic Stone Treatment-Results in Terms of Complications, Quality of Life, and Stone-Free Rates Project.

BACKGROUND: The Post-Ureteroscopic Lesion Scale (PULS) is a validated, standardised scale that classifies iatrogenic ureteral lesions during ureteroscopy (URS). OBJECTIVE: To determine risk factors for the various PULS-grades caused by URS. METHOD: We prospectively investigated the independent influence of various risk factors in correlation with PULS-Grade 1+ and 2+ on 307 patients with ureterorenoscopic stone treatment from 14 German urologic departments. RESULTS: The following are the outcomes of the study: 117 (38.4%) and 188 (61.6%) of the calculi (median stone size 6 mm) were found in the kidney or ureter; 70% and 82.4% underwent preoperative or postoperative ureteral stenting; 44.3 and 7.2% received laser or ballistic lithotripsy; 60% of the patients presented with PULS grade 1+ and 8% with PULS grade of 2+. Only intracorporal lithotripsy revealed a significant independent risk factor for PULS grade 1+ or 2+. Both laser and ballistic therapies raised the probability of PULS grade 1+ by the factors 3.6 (p < 0.001) and 3.9 (p = 0.021), respectively. The ORs in conjunction with PULS grade 2+ were 3.1 (p = 0.038) and 5.8 (p = 0.014) respectively. Neither endpoint exhibited a significant difference regarding the lithotripsic procedure (laser vs. ballistic). CONCLUSION: Intracorporal lithotripsy is associated with a significant increase in damage to the ureter; further research is needed to determine its long-term effects.

Kelley-Seegmiller Syndrome: Urolithiasis, Renal Uric Acid Deposits, and Gout: What is the Role of the Urologist?

Kelley-Seegmiller syndrome (KSS) is a disorder that occurs when there is a partial deficiency of the enzyme hypoxanthine guanine phosphoribosyl transferase. It is involved in the metabolism of purines, clinically manifesting as hyperuricemia, hyperuricosuria, gout arthritis, and urolithiasis. The aim of this article is to present the case of a 33-year-old male with KSS, with left ureteral colic, and a 5-mm, 323-HU ureteral calculi, successfully managed with conservative management. It is critical to recognize that most urologists are not familiar with this inborn metabolic error and 75% of these patients will be affected by urolithiasis, thus making it a very critical and significant disease in our practice.