Impact of COVID-19 on the management and outcomes of ureteric stones in the UK: a multicentre retrospective study
- PMID: 36083711
- PMCID: PMC9539039
- DOI: 10.1111/bju.15882
Impact of COVID-19 on the management and outcomes of ureteric stones in the UK: a multicentre retrospective study
Abstract
Objectives: To determine if management of ureteric stones in the UK changed during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and whether this affected patient outcomes.
Patients and methods: We conducted a multicentre retrospective study of adults with computed tomography-confirmed ureteric stone disease at 39 UK hospitals during a pre-pandemic period (23/3/2019-22/6/2019) and a period during the pandemic (the 3-month period after the first severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 case at individual sites). The primary outcome was success of primary treatment modality, defined as no further treatment required for the index ureteric stone. Our study protocol was published prior to data collection.
Results: A total of 3735 patients were included (pre-pandemic 1956 patients; pandemic 1779 patients). Stone size was similar between groups (P > 0.05). During the pandemic, patients had lower hospital admission rates (pre-pandemic 54.0% vs pandemic 46.5%, P < 0.001), shorter mean length of stay (4.1 vs 3.3 days, P = 0.02), and higher rates of use of medical expulsive therapy (17.4% vs 25.4%, P < 0.001). In patients who received interventional management (pre-pandemic 787 vs pandemic 685), rates of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (22.7% vs 34.1%, P < 0.001) and nephrostomy were higher (7.1% vs 10.5%, P = 0.03); and rates of ureteroscopy (57.2% vs 47.5%, P < 0.001), stent insertion (68.4% vs 54.6%, P < 0.001), and general anaesthetic (92.2% vs 76.2%, P < 0.001) were lower. There was no difference in success of primary treatment modality between patient cohorts (pre-pandemic 73.8% vs pandemic 76.1%, P = 0.11), nor when patients were stratified by treatment modality or stone size. Rates of operative complications, 30-day mortality, and re-admission and renal function at 6 months did not differ between the data collection periods.
Conclusions: During the COVID-19 pandemic, there were lower admission rates and fewer invasive procedures performed. Despite this, there were no differences in treatment success or outcomes. Our findings indicate that clinicians can safely adopt management strategies developed during the pandemic to treat more patients conservatively and in the community.
Keywords: COVID-19; ESWL; conservative management; management; nephrostomy; patient outcomes; ureteral stone; ureteric stone; ureteroscopy; urolithiasis.
© 2022 The Authors. BJU International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJU International.
References
-
- Chen Z, Prosperi M, Bird VY. Prevalence of kidney stones in the USA: the National Health and Nutrition Evaluation Survey. J Clin Urol 2018; 12: 296-302
-
- Sorokin I, Mamoulakis C, Miyazawa K, Rodgers A, Talati J, Lotan Y. Epidemiology of stone disease across the world. World J Urol 2017; 35: 1301-20
-
- Geraghty RM, Cook P, Walker V, Somani BK. Evaluation of the economic burden of kidney stone disease in the UK: a retrospective cohort study with a mean follow-up of 19 years. BJU Int 2020; 125: 586-94
-
- Shah TT, Gao C, Peters M et al. Factors associated with spontaneous stone passage in a contemporary cohort of patients presenting with acute ureteric colic: results from the multi-centre cohort study evaluating the role of inflammatory markers in patients presenting with acute ureteric. BJU Int 2019; 124: 504-13
-
- Kum F, Mahmalji W, Hale J, Thomas K, Bultitude M, Glass J. Do stones still kill? An analysis of death from stone disease 1999-2013 in England and Wales. BJU Int 2016; 118: 140-4