To evaluate the role of double J stent versus no stent in patients of renal and upper ureteric calculus undergoing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy

Authors

  • Vaishali Shirale Associate Professor, Department of Surgery, ESI-PGIMSR, Basaidarapur, New Delhi,India https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7311-4338
  • Sudhir Kumar Jain Professor and Head of the Unit, Department of Surgery, ESIC Medical College and Hospital, Faridabad, Haryana, (Formerly Director Professor, Department of Surgery MAMC and Lok Nayak Hospital, New Delhi, India) https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0879-6878
  • Rohit Kaushik Senior Resident, Department of Surgery , All India Institute of Medical Science, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3126/ajms.v13i7.43012

Keywords:

Double-J stent, Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, Pain, Renal and upper ureteric calculus, Stone clearance

Abstract

Background: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) was first introduced by Chaussy in 1980 for the treatment of urolithiasis, which has revolutionized the treatment of urinary stones. Renal colic, urinary tract obstruction, uremia, and renal failure can occur because of the stone fragments obstructing the ureter during the post-ESWL period. The role of double-J (DJ) stents in ESWL is controversial.

Aims and Objectives: The aim of the study was to evaluate the role of DJ stent in patients with renal and upper ureteric calculus undergoing extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy.

Materials and Methods: Two hundred patients with solitary calculus 5 mm–2 cm in size, amenable to ESWL, located in renal pelvis, upper or middle calyx, upper ureter visiting Lok Nayak Hospital, New Delhi from December 2015 to April 2019 were studied and randomized into two groups: Test group (non-stented, 100 patients) and control group (Stented, 100 patients). Both groups underwent ESWL and subsequently compared for the following parameters: Stone clearance, post lithotripsy pain and analgesic dose requirement, number of ESWL sittings and shockwaves required, steinstrasse, urinary tract infection (UTI), and hematuria. Patients were followed up for 3 months after stone clearance to look for any recurrence.

Results: There was a significant difference (P<0.05) in the two groups with smaller number of ESWL sittings and number of shockwaves required, low frequency of colicky pain episodes and mean pain score, less analgesic dose requirement, lower incidence of hematuria, and UTI in non-DJ stent group. The overall stone clearance was higher in the non-DJ stent group (96.4%) as compared to the DJ stent group (89.3%). The incidence of steinstrasse was higher in the DJ stent group (10.7%) as compared to none in the non-DJ stent group.

Conclusions: There is no additional benefit of DJ stent on stone clearance, rather stenting further increases the morbidity due to associated complications. DJ stenting should not be performed in patients undergoing ESWL for renal and upper ureteric calculus up to 2 cm size.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Abstract
131
PDF
161

Downloads

Published

2022-07-01

How to Cite

Shirale, V., Jain, S. K., & Kaushik, R. (2022). To evaluate the role of double J stent versus no stent in patients of renal and upper ureteric calculus undergoing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Asian Journal of Medical Sciences, 13(7), 216–222. https://doi.org/10.3126/ajms.v13i7.43012

Issue

Vol. 13 No. 7 (2022)

Section

Original Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Asian Journal of Medical Sciences

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. The journal holds copyright and publishes the work under a Creative Commons CC-BY-NC license that permits use, distribution and reprduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes. The journal should be recognised as the original publisher of this work.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).