Ureteral Stent Removal Using an Extraction String After Uncomplicated Ureteroscopy: A Cost-Benefit Analysis

Q: How can I download an article?

To download an article from SID, first log in to the site, search for the article title, and click on the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I download an ISI article?

To download an ISI article on SID, enter the keyword or article title in the search bar, view the relevant results, click on the desired article, and select the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I access the SID database?

To access the SID database, visit SID.ir, create an account, and log in to access scientific resources.

Q: Is downloading articles from SID free?

Some articles on SID are available for free, while others require payment. Details are specified on the article's page.

Liu Hao; Pan Weiyun; Zhang Nan

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Journal Paper

Paper Information

Journal: UROLOGY JOURNAL Year:2018 | Volume:15 | Issue:6 Page(s): 329-333

Download Full-Text

View:

201

Download:

128

Cites:

Information Journal Paper

Title

Ureteral Stent Removal Using an Extraction String After Uncomplicated Ureteroscopy: A Cost-Benefit Analysis

Author(s)

Liu Hao | Pan Weiyun | Zhang Nan | Issue Writer Certificate

Keywords

ureteral stent

cost-benefit analysis

extraction string

Abstract

Purpose: Some urologists use the extraction strings for removal of ureteral stent without cystoscopy. While some urologists may have concern about perceived risks, including accidental dislodgement, infection, renal colic and lower urinary tract symptoms. Therefore, we performed a retrospective study to help resolve this conflict. Materials and Methods: Patients who had an indwelling ureteral stent with (n = 58) or without (n = 82) extraction strings inserted after ureteroscopy for unilateral ureteral stone were enrolled. For ureteral stent removal, the strings were pulled by physician, no string-stents were removed by cystoscopy. Postoperative morbidity was assessed. Patients' medical expense due to postoperative morbidity was gathered. Results: Patients with extraction string had shorter stent dwell time (5. 3 ± 1. 8 versus 11. 2 ± 3. 2 days, P =. 001) and less costly (8. 97 ± 3. 07 versus 455 ± 0 CNY, P =. 001)) for ureteral stent removal. However, six patients with extraction string had an accidental dislodgement, additional medical expenses were 345± 137. 9 CNY. There was no difference in the cost due to urinary tract infection, renal colic and LUTS between the two groups. The overall cost of patients without an extraction string was significantly more than in patients with an extraction string (86. 7 ± 167. 7 versus 507. 9 ± 147. 8 CNY, p =. 008). Conclusion: Despite an increase in stent dislodgement related risks to the extraction string, it results in significant cost savings for patients, and the most patients remove with extraction strings might benefit from it.

Cites

No record.

References

No record.

Cite

APA: Copy

Liu, Hao, Pan, Weiyun, & Zhang, Nan. (2018). Ureteral Stent Removal Using an Extraction String After Uncomplicated Ureteroscopy: A Cost-Benefit Analysis. UROLOGY JOURNAL, 15(6), 329-333. SID. https://sid.ir/paper/271254/en

Vancouver: Copy

Liu Hao, Pan Weiyun, Zhang Nan. Ureteral Stent Removal Using an Extraction String After Uncomplicated Ureteroscopy: A Cost-Benefit Analysis. UROLOGY JOURNAL[Internet]. 2018;15(6):329-333. Available from: https://sid.ir/paper/271254/en

IEEE: Copy

Hao Liu, Weiyun Pan, and Nan Zhang, “Ureteral Stent Removal Using an Extraction String After Uncomplicated Ureteroscopy: A Cost-Benefit Analysis,” UROLOGY JOURNAL, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 329–333, 2018, [Online]. Available: https://sid.ir/paper/271254/en

Related Journal Papers

No record.

Related Seminar Papers

No record.

Related Plans

No record.

Recommended Workshops