Use of metallic and polymeric ureteral stents in malignant ureteral obstruction.

Abstract

BackgroundMalignant ureteral obstruction (MUO) is often caused by advanced intra‐abdominal cancers. Effective management must be attempted, but the treatment policy is unclear. Metallic ureteral stents are one of the latest options in managing MUO. Metallic ureteral stents are superior to traditional polyurethane stents. The present study retrospectively reviewed our four institutions’ experiences with treating MUO using metallic ureteral stent.MethodsA total of 45 patients who required metallic ureteral stent placement for MUO at Yokohama City University Medical Center (Yokohama, JAPAN) between January 2014 and May 2016 were analyzed. We defined stent failure as having to change the ureteral stent before the scheduled ureteral stent exchange time or having to perform percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN). Complications were defined as an unscheduled hospital visit or hospitalization caused by incompatibility, infection, and pain of the metallic ureteral stent, etc., unrelated to the primary disease. We compared stent failure and the overall survival (OS) between metallic and polymeric ureteral stents. To evaluate the workload of the medical staff, we used the NASA Task Load Index (NASA‐TLX) in a total of 11 urologists.ResultsDuring the observation period, 8 (17.8%) patients in the metallic ureteral stent group and 10 (27.8%) in the control group developed stent failure. Complications were noted in 14 (31.1%) patients in the metallic ureteral stent group and 15 (41.7%) patients in the control group. A Kaplan–Meier analysis and log‐rank test showed no significant differences between two groups in the overall survival (P = 0.673). One or more complications developed in 19 (32.2%) patients in the metallic ureteral stent group and 18 (38.3%) patients in the control group (P = 0.409). Renal dysfunction after the replacement of the ureteral stent developed in 9 (15.3%) patients in the metallic ureteral stent group and 14 (29.8%) patients in the control group. No patients developed a urinary tract infection (UTI) that required hospitalization in the metallic ureteral stent group, whereas 3 (6.4%) patients in the control group had a UTI that was treated with hospitalization. The average workload score in the six subscales was analyzed, and the scores for mental demand and performance were higher in the metallic ureteral stent group, although there was no significant difference between the metallic and polymeric ureteral stent groups.ConclusionsMetallic ureteral stents showed favorable ureteral stent patency and reduced the workload for urologists.