Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Current Urology Reports
Erschienen in: Current Urology Reports 2/2010

01.03.2010

Current Status of Ureteral Stent Technologies: Comfort and Antimicrobial Resistance

verfasst von: Carlos E. Mendez-Probst, Alfonso Fernandez, John D. Denstedt

Erschienen in: Current Urology Reports | Ausgabe 2/2010

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The placement of a ureteral stent is one of the most commonly performed urologic procedures. Indwelling ureteral stents are often accompanied by significant patient morbidity, including lower urinary tract symptoms, flank pain, and urinary tract infections. This article reviews the current state of ureteral stent technology developed to address the problem of stent discomfort and infection.
Literatur
1.
Joshi HB, Stainthorpe A, Keeley FX Jr, et al.: Indwelling ureteral stents: evaluation of quality of life to aid outcome analysis. J Endourol 2001, 15:151–154.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Leibovici D, Cooper A, Lindner A, et al.: Ureteral stents: morbidity and impact on quality of life. Isr Med Assoc J 2005, 7:491–494.PubMed
3.
Lennon GM, Thornhill JA, Sweeney PA, et al.: ‘Firm’ versus ‘soft’ double pigtail ureteric stents: a randomised blind comparative trial. Eur Urol 1995, 28:1–5.PubMed
4.
Joshi HB, Chitale SV, Nagarajan M, et al.: A prospective randomized single-blind comparison of ureteral stents composed of firm and soft polymer. J Urol 2005, 174:2303–2306.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Pryor JL, Langley MJ, Jenkins AD: Comparison of symptom characteristics of indwelling ureteral catheters. J Urol 1991, 145:719–722.PubMed
6.
Lee C, Kuskowski M, Premoli J, et al.: Randomized evaluation of ureteral stents using validated symptom questionnaire. J Endourol 2005, 19:990–993.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Lingeman JE, Preminger GM, Goldfischer ER, Krambeck AE; Comfort Study Team: Assessing the impact of ureteral stent design on patient comfort. J Urol 2009, 181:2581–2587.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Dunn MD, Portis AJ, Kahn SA, et al.: Clinical effectiveness of new stent design: randomized single-blind comparison of tail and double-pigtail stents. J Endourol. 2000, 14:195–202
9.
Lumiaho J, Heino A, Kauppinen T, et al.: Drainage and antireflux characteristics of a biodegradable self-reinforced, self-expanding X-ray-positive poly-L,D-lactide spiral partial ureteral stent: an experimental study. J Endourol 2007, 21:1559–1564.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Erturk E, Sessions A, Joseph JV: Impact of ureteral stent diameter on symptoms and tolerability. J Endourol 2003, 17:59–62.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Chandhoke PS, Barqawi AZ, Wernecke C, Chee-Awai RA: A randomized outcomes trial of ureteral stents for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of solitary kidney or proximal ureteral stones. J Urol 2002, 167:1981–1983.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Damiano R, Autorino R, De Sio M, et al.: Does the size of ureteral stent impact urinary symptoms and quality of life? A prospective randomized study. Eur Urol 2005, 48:673–678.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Al-Kandari AM, Al-Shaiji TF, Shaaban H, et al.: Effects of proximal and distal ends of double-J ureteral stent position on postprocedural symptoms and quality of life: a randomized clinical trial. J Endourol 2007, 21:698–702.CrossRefPubMed
14.
El-Nahas AR, El-Assmy AM, Shoma AM, et al.: Self-retaining ureteral stents: analysis of factors responsible for patients’ discomfort. J Endourol 2006, 20:33–37.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Rane A, Saleemi A, Cahill D, et al.: Have stent-related symptoms anything to do with placement technique? J Endourol 2001, 15:741–745.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Norris RD, Sur RL, Springhart WP, et al.: A prospective, randomized, double- blinded placebo-controlled comparison of extended release oxybutynin versus phenazopyridine for the management of postoperative ureteral stent discomfort. Urology 2008, 71:792–795.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Beddingfield R, Pedro RN, Hinck B, et al.: Alfuzosin to relieve ureteral stent discomfort: a prospective, randomized, placebo controlled study. J Urol 2009, 181:170–176.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Deliveliotis C, Chrisofos M, Gougousis E, et al.: Is there a role for alpha1- blockers in treating double-J stent-related symptoms? Urology 2006, 67:35–39.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Damiano R, Autorino R, De Sio M, et al.: Effect of tamsulosin in preventing ureteral stent-related morbidity: a prospective study. J Endourol 2008, 22:651–656.CrossRefPubMed
20.
• Wang CJ, Huang SW, Chang CH: Effects of specific alpha-1A/1D blocker on lower urinary tract symptoms due to double-J stent: a prospectively randomized study. Urol Res 2009, 37:147–152. This solid and large randomized clinical trial shows the effect of a superselective α- blocker for stent-related symptoms.
21.
Beiko DT, Watterson JD, Knudsen BE, et al.: Double-blind randomized controlled trial assessing the safety and efficacy of intravesical agents for ureteral stent symptoms after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. J Endourol 2004, 18:723–730.PubMed
22.
Sur RL, Haleblian GE, Cantor DA, et al.: Efficacy of intravesical ropivacaine injection on urinary symptoms following ureteral stenting: a randomized, controlled study. J Endourol 2008, 22:473–478.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Chew B, Davoudi H, Li J, Denstedt JD: An in vivo porcine evaluation of the safety, bioavailability and tissue penetration of ketorolac drug eluting ureteral stent designed to improve comfort. J Endourol 2009 (in press).
24.
Krambeck AM, Walsh RS, Denstedt JD, et al.: A novel drug eluting stent: a prospective, randomized, multicenter clinical trial to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of a ketorolac loaded ureteral stent. J Urol 2009 (in press).
25.
Paz A, Amiel GE, Pick N, et al.: Febrile complications following insertion of 100 double-J ureteral stents. J Endourol 2005, 19:147–150.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Costerton JW, Cheng KJ, Geesey GG, et al.: Bacterial biofilm in nature and disease. Ann Rev Microbiol 1987, 41:435–464.CrossRef
27.
Reid G, Sobel JD: Bacterial adherence in the pathogenesis of urinary tract infection: a review. Rev Infect Dis 1987, 9:470–487.PubMed
28.
Riedl CR, Plas E, Hubner W, et al.: Bacterial colonization of ureteral stents. Eur Urol 1999, 36:53–59.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Akai F, Aflay U, Gedik A, et al.: Risk factors for lower urinary tract infection and bacterial stent colonization in patients with a double J ureteral stent. Int Urol Nephrol 2007, 39:95–98.CrossRef
30.
Klis R, Korczak-Kozakiewicz E, Denys A, et al.: Relationship between urinary tract infection and self-retaining double J catheter colonization. J Urol 2009, 23:1015–1019.
31.
Lojanapiwat B: Colonization of internal ureteral stent and bacteriuria. World J Urol 2006, 24:681–683.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Connell I, Agace W, Klemm P, et al.: Type I fimbrial expression enhances Escherichia coli virulence for the urinary tract. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1996, 93:9827–9832.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Santin M, Motta A, Denyer SP, Cannas M: Effect of the urine conditioning film on ureteral stent encrustation and characterization of its protein composition. Biomaterials 1999, 20:1245–1251.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Denstedt JD, Reid G, Sofer M: Advances in ureteral stent technology. World J Urol 2000, 18:237–242.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Reid G, Tieszer C, Denstedt JD, Kingston D: Examination of bacterial and encrustation deposition on ureteral stents of differing surface properties, after indwelling in humans. Coll Surf B Biointerfaces 1995, 5:171–179.CrossRef
36.
Reid G, Busscher HJ: Importance of surface properties in bacterial adhesion to biomaterials, with particular reference to the urinary tract. Int Biodeter Biodegrad 1992, 30:105–122.CrossRef
37.
Gristina AG: Biomaterial-centered infection: microbial adhesion versus tissue integration. Science 1987, 237:1588–1595.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Characklis WG, Marshall KC: Biofilms: a basis for interdisciplinary approach. In Biofilms. Edited by Characklis WG, Marshall KC. New York: John Wiley and Sons;1990:3–15.
39.
Reid G, Busscher HJ: Microbial biofilms and urinary tract infections. Urinary tract infections. London: Chapman and Hall; 1998:111–118.
40.
• Stickler DJ: Bacterial biofilms in patients with indwelling urinary catheters. Nat Clin Pract 2008, 5:598–608. This is a comprehensive review of the mechanisms of biofilm formation.
41.
Salo J, Devancer JJ, Tapiainen T, et al.: Biofilm formation by Escherichia coli isolated from patients with urinary tract infections. Clin Nephrol 2009, 71:501–507.PubMed
42.
Hasan F, Xess I, Wang X, et al.: Biofilm formation in clinical Candida isolates and its association with virulence. Microbes Infect 2009, 11:753–761.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Raad R, Darouiche J, Dupuis D, et al.: Central venous catheters coated with minocycline and rifampin for the prevention of catheter related colonization and bloodstream infections. Ann Intern Med 1997, 127:267–274.PubMed
44.
Cadieux PA, Chew B, Nott L, et al.: Use of triclosan-eluting ureteral stents in patients with long-term stents. J Endourol 2009, 23:1187–1188.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Cadieux PA, Chew BH, Knudsen BE, et al.: Triclosan loaded ureteral stents decrease Proteus mirabilis 296 infection in a rabbit urinary tract infection model. J Urol 2006, 175:2331.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Chew BH, Cadieux PA, Reid G, et al.: In-vitro activity of triclosan-eluting ureteral stents against common bacterial uropathogens. J Endourol 2006, 20:949.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Elwood CN, Chew BH, Seney S, et al.: Triclosan inhibits uropathogenic Escherichia coli-stimulated tumor necrosis factor-α secretion in T24 bladder cells in vitro. J Endourol 2007, 21:1217–1222.CrossRefPubMed
48.
Angell AH, Resnick MI: Surface interaction between glycosaminoglycans and calcium oxalate. J Urol 1989, 141:1255.PubMed
49.
Appelgren P, Ransjo U, Bindslev L, et al.: Surface heparinization of central venous catheters reduces microbial colonization in vitro and in vivo: results from a prospective, randomized trial. Crit Care Med 1996, 24:1482.CrossRefPubMed
50.
Lange D, Elwood C, Choi K, et al.: Uropathogen interaction with the surface of urological stents using different surface properties. J Urol 2009, 182:1194–1200.CrossRefPubMed
51.
Cauda F, Cauda V, Fiori C, et al.: Heparin coating on ureteral double J stents prevents encrustations: an in vivo case study. J Endourol 2008, 22:465–472.CrossRefPubMed
52.
Hancock RE, Scott MG: The role of antimicrobial peptides in animal defenses. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2000, 97:8856–8861.CrossRefPubMed
53.
Minardi D, Ghiselli R, Cirioni O, et al.: The antimicrobial tachyplesin III coated alone and in combination with intraperitoneal piperacillin-tazobactam prevents ureteral stent Pseudomonas infection in a rat subcutaneous pouch model. Peptides 2007, 28:2293–2298.CrossRefPubMed
54.
Balaban N, Gov Y, Bitler A, Boelaert JR: Prevention of staphylococcus aureus biofilm on dialysis catheters and adherence to human cells. Kidney Int 2003, 63:340–345.CrossRefPubMed
55.
Cirioni O, Ghiselli R, Minardi D, et al.: RNAIII-Inhibiting peptide affects biofilm formation in a rat model of staphylococcal ureteral stent infection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007, 51:4518–4520.CrossRefPubMed
56.
Laube N, Kleinen L, Bradenhal J, Meissner A: Diamond-like carbon coatings on ureteral stents: a new strategy for decreasing the formation of crystalline bacterial biofilms?. J Urol 2007, 177:1923–1927.CrossRefPubMed
57.
Denstedt JD, Cadieux PA: Eliminating biofilm from ureteric stents: the holy grail. Curr Op Urol 2009, 19:205–210.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Current Status of Ureteral Stent Technologies: Comfort and Antimicrobial Resistance
verfasst von
Carlos E. Mendez-Probst
Alfonso Fernandez
John D. Denstedt
Publikationsdatum
01.03.2010
Verlag
Current Science Inc.
Erschienen in
Current Urology Reports / Ausgabe 2/2010
Print ISSN: 1527-2737
Elektronische ISSN: 1534-6285
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-010-0091-y

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2010

Current Urology Reports 2/2010 Zur Ausgabe

ReviewPaper

Urologic Sports Injuries in Children

ReviewPaper

Transvesical Endoscopic Port in Abdominal Surgery: An Updated Perspective

ReviewPaper

Evaluation and Follow-Up of Patients with Urinary Lithiasis: Minimizing Radiation Exposure

ReviewPaper

Residency Training Program Paradigms for Teaching Robotic Surgical Skills to Urology Residents

ReviewPaper

Biofeedback in the Management of Urinary Continence in Children

ReviewPaper

Urinary Tract Infections in Children: Recommendations for Antibiotic Prophylaxis and Evaluation. An Evidence-Based Approach

Neu im Fachgebiet Urologie

Adjuvante Immuntherapie verlängert Leben bei RCC

25.04.2024 Nierenkarzinom Nachrichten

Nun gibt es auch Resultate zum Gesamtüberleben: Eine adjuvante Pembrolizumab-Therapie konnte in einer Phase-3-Studie das Leben von Menschen mit Nierenzellkarzinom deutlich verlängern. Die Sterberate war im Vergleich zu Placebo um 38% geringer.

Bei Senioren mit Prostatakarzinom auf Anämie achten!

24.04.2024 DGIM 2024 Nachrichten

Patienten, die zur Behandlung ihres Prostatakarzinoms eine Androgendeprivationstherapie erhalten, entwickeln nicht selten eine Anämie. Wer ältere Patienten internistisch mitbetreut, sollte auf diese Nebenwirkung achten.

Stufenschema weist Prostatakarzinom zuverlässig nach

22.04.2024 Prostatakarzinom Nachrichten

Erst PSA-Test, dann Kallikrein-Score, schließlich MRT und Biopsie – ein vierstufiges Screening-Schema kann die Zahl der unnötigen Prostatabiopsien erheblich reduzieren: Die Hälfte der Männer, die in einer finnischen Studie eine Biopsie benötigten, hatte einen hochgradigen Tumor.

Harnwegsinfektprophylaxe: Es geht auch ohne Antibiotika

20.04.2024 EAU 2024 Kongressbericht

Beim chronischen Harnwegsinfekt bei Frauen wird bisher meist eine Antibiotikaprophylaxe eingesetzt. Angesichts der zunehmenden Antibiotikaresistenz erweist sich das Antiseptikum Methenamin-Hippurat als vielversprechende Alternative, so die Auswertung einer randomisierten kontrollierten Studie.

Update Urologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise