Drainage of infected kidneys with ureteral stents: does size matter?
- PMID: 35731266
- DOI: 10.1007/s00345-022-04070-8
Drainage of infected kidneys with ureteral stents: does size matter?
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of our study was to evaluate the ability of ureteral stents with different diameters to drain pus that accumulates in an obstructed kidney using an in vitro model.
Methods: We developed an in vitro model of an obstructed kidney filled with pus. The model included a silicon kidney unit based on computed tomography (CT) data, a 3D printed ureteral stone based on a real extracted ureteral stone, a latex ureter model, a bladder vessel, and a fluid with qualities resembling pus. Identical printed stones were inserted into four ureter models containing stents with varying diameters (4.8F, 6F, 7F, 8F), each of which was connected to the kidney unit and the bladder vessel. The kidney unit was filled with artificial pus to pressures of 30 cmH2O to simulate an infected and obstructed kidney. The obstruction was relieved with stents in place, while artificial urine was pumped into the kidney; pressure in the kidney and remaining pus were measured continuously.
Results: The rate of pressure drop and the final pressure measured in the kidney were unaffected by the diameter of the stent. For all stent diameters, the pressure reached non-obstructed levels within 30 s, final pressure was reached within 90-120 s, and minimal amounts of pus remained in the kidney after 120 min.
Conclusions: In vitro experiments demonstrate that all stent diameters drain pus-filled, obstructed kidneys with the same efficacy. The common perception that larger diameter tubes are more effective under such circumstances should be re-examined.
Keywords: In vitro experiment; Pus; Pyonephrosis; Stent diameter; Urolithiasis.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
References
-
- Scales CD Jr, Smith AC, Hanley JM, Saigal CS (2012) Prevalence of kidney stones in the United States. Eur Urol 62(1):160–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.03.052 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
-
- Borofsky MS, Walter D, Shah O, Goldfarb DS, Mues AC, Makarov DV (2013) Surgical decompression is associated with decreased mortality in patients with sepsis and ureteral calculi. J Urol 189(3):946–951. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.09.088 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Pearle MS, Pierce HL, Miller GL, Summa JA, Mutz JM, Petty BA, Roehrborn CG, Kryger JV, Nakada SY (1998) Optimal method of urgent decompression of the collecting system for obstruction and infection due to ureteral calculi. J Urol 160(4):1260–1264. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)62511-4 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Flukes S, Hayne D, Kuan M, Wallace M, McMillan K, Rukin NJ (2015) Retrograde ureteric stent insertion in the management of infected obstructed kidneys. BJU Int 115(5):31–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12918 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Ramsey S, Robertson A, Ablett MJ, Meddings RN, Hollins GW, Little B (2010) Evidence-Based Drainage of Infected Hydronephrosis Secondary to Ureteric Calculi. J Endourol 24(2):185–189. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2009.0361 - DOI - PubMed