Prevention of retrograde calculus migration with the Stone Cone
- PMID: 15625610
- DOI: 10.1007/s00240-004-0453-3
Prevention of retrograde calculus migration with the Stone Cone
Abstract
Retrograde calculus migration during ureteroscopic lithotripsy remains a problem in 5-40% of cases. We assessed the safety and efficacy of the Stone Cone device, in comparison with the standard flat wire basket. A total of 56 consecutive patients with ureteral calculi, suitable for ureteroscopic extraction and/or lithotripsy, where included in this prospective study. Patients were randomly allocated into two groups. In group A (30 patients), we used the Stone Cone, while in group B (26 patients) we used the standard flat wire basket. The Stone Cone was placed through a cystoscope under fluoroscopic guidance, or when necessary under direct ureteroscopic control. Whenever necessary, intracorporeal electrohydraulic lithotripsy took place in both groups. Statistical significance was assessed by the paired t-test. The mean operative time was 48.5 min in group A, and 42.4 min in group B. Intact calculus extraction was possible in 16.6% in group A, and in 7.6% in group B (P < 0.01). Retrograde stone migration was revealed in 23% in group B only (P < 0.001). Also, residual fragments > 3 mm were recorded in 30.7% in group B only (P < 0.001). None of the patients in group A required auxiliary procedures, in contrary to 23% in group B (P < 0.001). No major complications were recorded in group A, while in group B a case of major ureteral mucosal abrasion was recorded. The Stone Cone is safe and efficient in preventing retrograde stone migration and in minimizing residual fragments during ureteroscopic lithotripsy in comparison with the flat wire basket.
Similar articles
-
The Dretler stone cone: a device to prevent ureteral stone migration-the initial clinical experience.J Urol. 2002 May;167(5):1985-8. J Urol. 2002. PMID: 11956424
-
Use of the Stone Cone for prevention of calculus retropulsion during holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy: case series and review of the literature.Urol Int. 2009;82(3):356-60. doi: 10.1159/000209372. Epub 2009 May 11. Urol Int. 2009. PMID: 19440028 Review.
-
[Stone Cone: a device that prevents ureteral stone migration during intracorporeal lithotripsy].Arch Esp Urol. 2005 May;58(4):329-34. Arch Esp Urol. 2005. PMID: 15989097 Spanish.
-
Efficacy of dretler stone cone in the treatment of ureteral stones with pneumatic lithotripsy.Urol Int. 2006;76(2):159-62. doi: 10.1159/000090881. Urol Int. 2006. PMID: 16493219 Clinical Trial.
-
Antiretropulsion devices.Curr Opin Urol. 2014 Mar;24(2):173-8. doi: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000000032. Curr Opin Urol. 2014. PMID: 24418744 Review.
Cited by
-
Dual usage of a stone basket: Stone capture and retropulsion prevention.Can Urol Assoc J. 2018 Aug;12(8):280-283. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.5021. Epub 2018 May 28. Can Urol Assoc J. 2018. PMID: 29989913 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of Stone Retrieval Basket, Stone Cone and Holmium Laser: Which One Is Better in Retropulsion and Stone-Free Status for Patients with Upper Ureteral Calculi?J Lasers Med Sci. 2019 Summer;10(3):179-184. doi: 10.15171/jlms.2019.28. Epub 2019 Jul 6. J Lasers Med Sci. 2019. PMID: 31749942 Free PMC article.
-
Preventing stone retropulsion during intracorporeal lithotripsy.Nat Rev Urol. 2012 Dec;9(12):691-8. doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2012.204. Epub 2012 Nov 20. Nat Rev Urol. 2012. PMID: 23165399 Review.
-
Efficacy and safety of the Accordion stone-trapping device: in vitro results from an artificial ureterolithotripsy model.Urol Res. 2010 Feb;38(1):41-6. doi: 10.1007/s00240-009-0232-2. Epub 2009 Nov 27. Urol Res. 2010. PMID: 19943042
-
Prevention of stone retropulsion during ureteroscopy: Limitations in resources invites revival of old techniques.Arab J Urol. 2020 Aug 13;18(4):252-256. doi: 10.1080/2090598X.2020.1805966. Arab J Urol. 2020. PMID: 33312737 Free PMC article.
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources