The Function Improved of the Newly Designed Magnetic-End Ureteric Stenting Retrieval Device: A Clinical Prospective Randomized and Control Trial in a Multicenter Study

Objective To demonstrate the advantage of our newly designed magnetic ureteric stenting retrieval device over traditional nonmagnetic ureteric stents and other retrieval devices without cystoscopy intervention on clinical application and cost-related outcomes. Patients and Methods. A total of 333 patients were recruited into two study groups: magnetic-end ureteral stent (Group A) and conventional ureteral stent (Group B). The effects were evaluated by Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire (USSQ) scores, complications of the indwelling stent, visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores at stent removal, and cost-analysis outcomes between the magnetic ureteric stenting retrieval device and traditional double-J ureteral stent (DJUS) removed by cystoscopy. Results The VAS of the pain score of patients undergoing magnetic stent removal with the retrieval device was 2 ± 0.97, whereas that of patients undergoing conventional ureteral stent removal with cystoscopy was 5.76 ± 1.53 (p < 0.001). The removal of magnetic stents by a retrieval device proved to be less painful than cystoscopy-mediated stent removal (p < 0.001). Obviously, the total cost for the magnetic stent removal was much lower than the conventional ureteral stent removal, although the magnetic stent costs more than the conventional ureteral stent. The improved magnetic stent used in our study showed a remarkable cost saving of 705/111 USD Chinese Yuan (CNY) per patient when compared with the conventional ureteral stent. Conclusion We reported the integrated design features of the improved magnetic stent in the world, which was granted a patent in China. USSQ scores and rate of complications in the magnetic stent were as equally acceptable as a conventional stent. Furthermore, successful stent insertion rate reached 100% by both the antegrade and retrograde approaches, and no failure case of magnetic stent removal was reported in our study.

[1]  A. Kapoor,et al.  Comparison of a magnetic retrieval device vs. flexible cystoscopy for removal of ureteral stents in renal transplant patients: A randomized controlled trial. , 2020, Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada.

[2]  Y. Aigrain,et al.  Feasibility and safety of magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent insertion and removal in children , 2020, World Journal of Urology.

[3]  F. Soria,et al.  EXPERIMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF NEW GENERATION OF URETERAL STENTS. BIODEGRADABLE AND ANTI-REFLUX PROPERTIES. , 2020, Journal of endourology.

[4]  L. McLornan,et al.  Ureteric stenting with magnetic retrieval: an alternative to traditional methods , 2019, Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -).

[5]  S. Ferretti,et al.  Implementing a Ureteric Magnetic Stent in the Kidney Transplant Setting: Report of 100 Consecutive Cases. , 2019, Transplantation.

[6]  RitterManuel,et al.  Magnetic Ureteral Stent Removal Without Cystoscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial , 2017 .

[7]  S. Elsamra,et al.  Ureteral Stent-Associated Pain: A Review. , 2016, Journal of endourology.

[8]  T. Knoll,et al.  Ureteric stents on extraction strings: a systematic review of literature , 2016, Urolithiasis.

[9]  Yinghao Sun,et al.  Pressure Makes Pleasure: A Preliminary Study of Increasing Irrigation Pressure of Flexible Cystoscopy Improves Male Patient Comfort by an Easy Way. , 2015, Journal of endourology.

[10]  J. Son,et al.  Rethinking of ureteral stent removal using an extraction string; what patients feel and what is patients' preference? : a randomized controlled study , 2015, BMC Urology.

[11]  B. Eisner,et al.  Rate of dislodgment of ureteral stents when using an extraction string after endoscopic urological surgery. , 2015, The Journal of urology.

[12]  Arthur D. Smith,et al.  Symptoms after removal of ureteral stents. , 2015, Journal of endourology.

[13]  Kun-jie Wang,et al.  Effects of α-Blockers, Antimuscarinics, or Combination Therapy in Relieving Ureteral Stent-Related Symptoms: A Meta-Analysis. , 2014, Journal of endourology.

[14]  Chad R. Tracy,et al.  Do ureteric stent extraction strings affect stent‐related quality of life or complications after ureteroscopy for urolithiasis: a prospective randomised control trial , 2014, BJU international.

[15]  Chad R. Tracy,et al.  Ureteric stent placement with extraction string: no strings attached? , 2012, BJU international.

[16]  S. Vowler,et al.  Meta‐analysis showing the beneficial effect of α‐blockers on ureteric stent discomfort , 2011, BJU international.

[17]  I. Shergill,et al.  Flexible Cystoscopy Removal of Ureteric Stent: Is it Painful? , 2011 .

[18]  D. Aaronson,et al.  Meta‐analysis: does lidocaine gel before flexible cystoscopy provide pain relief? , 2009, BJU international.

[19]  G. Nabi,et al.  Outcomes of stenting after uncomplicated ureteroscopy: systematic review and meta-analysis , 2007, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[20]  F. Rodríguez‐Rubio,et al.  Patient Tolerance During Outpatient Flexible CystoscopyA Prospective, Randomized, Double‐blind Study Comparing Plain Lubrication and Lidocaine Gel , 2004, Scandinavian journal of urology and nephrology.

[21]  R. Finney Experience with new double J ureteral catheter stent. 1978. , 2002, The Journal of urology.