Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Current Urology Reports 12/2017

Open Access 01.12.2017 | Pediatric Urology (D Weiss, Section Editor)

Ureteroscopy for Stone Disease in Paediatric Population is Safe and Effective in Medium-Volume and High-Volume Centres: Evidence from a Systematic Review

verfasst von: Shazna Rob, Patrick Jones, Amelia Pietropaolo, Stephen Griffin, Bhaskar K. Somani

Erschienen in: Current Urology Reports | Ausgabe 12/2017

Abstract

Purpose of Review

The incidence of urinary stone disease among the paediatric population is increasing. Whilst there has been a rise in the number of original studies published on ureteroscopy (URS) in children, critical review still remains under-reported.

Recent Findings

A Cochrane style systematic review was performed to identify all original articles on URS (minimum of 25 cases) for stone disease in paediatric patients between Jan. 1996 and Dec. 2016. Based on the number of reported cases, centres were divided into medium (25–49 cases) and high (≥ 50 cases) volume studies.
Thirty-four studies (2758 children) satisfied our search criteria and were included in this review. The mean stone size was 8.6 mm with an overall stone-free rate (SFR) of 90.4% (range 58–100). Medium-volume centres reported a mean SFR of 94.1% (range 87.5–100), whilst high-volume centres reported a mean SFR of 88.1% (range 58–98.5). Mean number of sessions to achieve stone-free status in medium-volume and high-volume groups was 1.1 and 1.2 procedures/patient respectively. The overall complication rate was 11.1% (327/2994). Breakdown by Clavien grade was as follows: Clavien I 69% and Clavien II/III 31%. There were no Clavien IV/V complications, and no mortality was recorded across any of the studies. The overall failure to access rate was 2.5% (76/2944).
Medium-volume and high-volume studies had overall complication rates of 6.9% (37/530) and 12.1% (287/2222) respectively, but there was no significant difference in major or minor complications between these two groups.

Summary

Ureteroscopy is a safe and effective treatment for paediatric stone disease. Medium-volume centres can achieve equally high SFRs and safety profiles as high-volume centres. Despite the rarity of paediatric stone disease, our findings might increase the uptake of paediatric URS procedures.
Hinweise
This article is part of the Topical Collection on Paediatric Urology

Introduction

The incidence of urinary stone disease among the paediatric population is rising [1]. This has led to the development of minimally invasive and effective endourological interventions that can yield a high stone clearance whilst preserving renal function with low morbidity in these children. In the adult population, application of ureteroscopy (URS) globally has expanded over 200% in the past decade [2•]. This shift owes largely to major advances in surgical technique, laser technology and equipment minimisation. Similar changes have been mirrored in the management of paediatric stone disease, although Ritchey et al. first described URS in a young child in 1988 [3]. Whilst there has been a rise in the number of original studies published on this topic, critical evaluation of the safety and efficacy of URS for paediatric cases remains under-reported. The objective of this study was to therefore formally appraise the existing evidence. Furthermore, given the dissemination of URS and that its uptake is no longer limited to specialist centres, we sought to determine if there were any differences in clinical outcomes among these high-volume centres compared to those reporting medium volumes.

Material and Methods

Evidence Acquisition: Criteria for Considering Studies for This Review

Inclusion Criteria

  • Studies reporting on outcomes following ureteroscopy in paediatric populations
  • Patients aged ≤ 18

Exclusion Criteria

  • Study sample size < 25 patients
  • Non-English language articles
  • Animal studies

Search Strategy and Study Selection

A Cochrane style search was performed to identify all original articles investigating ureteroscopy in paediatric patients (Fig. 1). The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist was adhered to accordingly. Sensitive and customised search strategies were applied to the following online bibliographic databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, whilst citation lists and study references were also evaluated.
Search terms included (but not limited to) ‘ureteroscopy’, ‘URS’, ‘retrograde intra-renal surgery’, ‘RIRS’, ‘paediatric’, ‘pediatric’, ‘urolithiasis’ and ‘stones’. Boolean operators (AND, OR) were incorporated to refine the search. Medical subject headings (MeSH) included (not limited to) [Urinary calculi], [Ureteroscopy], [Lasers], [Child] and [Nephrolithiasis].
All study types were considered for potential inclusion. A time restriction was applied to include relevant studies published between January 1990 and December 2016. Paediatric age was defined as 18 years or less. Studies combining adult and paediatric populations with no breakdown of results were excluded.

Outcomes of Interest

Primary Outcomes

  • Procedure-related complications (graded according to Clavien-Dindo system)
  • Stone-free rates (SFRs)

Secondary Outcomes

  • Comparison of outcomes for ureteroscopy performed in medium-volume centres (reporting 25–49 procedures) and high-volume centres (reporting ≥ 50 procedures).

Data Extraction and Analysis

Both the search process and data extraction were performed by two authors (SR, PJ) independently and overseen by the senior author (BKS). Information was also collected on patient characteristics, total number of procedures performed and stone location. For the purposes of this review, centres reporting on 25–49 procedures were termed ‘medium-volume’ and ≥ 50 procedures as ‘high-volume’ centres. We did not include studies from centres that reported on < 25 procedures, which were deemed to be low-volume centres. Complications recorded intra-operatively or within the study follow period were included for analysis.
Chi-squared test and independent t test were used for dichotomous and continuous data respectively (SPSS version 21).

Results

Thirty-four studies [424, 25•, 2632, 33••, 3437] satisfied our search criteria and were included in this review (Table 1). These were all published between 1996 and 2016. A total of 2758 children underwent URS for urinary stone disease. The mean age was 7.8 years (range 0.25–18) with a male to female ratio of 1:1. No significant difference in age was present between these groups (p > 0.05). The mean stone size was 8.6 mm (range 1–30). Breakdown by stone location was as follows: upper ureter 13.3%, mid ureter 12.5%, lower ureter 56.6%, renal pelvis 3.5%, upper pole 1.2%, mid pole 1%, lower pole 8.4%, other 3.5%.
Table 1
Demographics of patients reported in the studies
Author
Journal
Year
Country
No. of procedures
Sample size (male/female)
Mean age (years) (range)
Mean stone size (range) (mm)
Medium-volume centres
 Schuster [6]
Journal of Urology
2002
USA
27*
25 (13/12)
9.2 (3 to 14)
6 (2–12)
 Dogan [7]
BJU International
2004
Turkey
35*
35 (15/20)
6.2 (1 to 14)
8 (4–15)
 Satar [8]
Journal of Urology
2004
Turkey
33*
33 (NR)
7.4 (0.75 to 15)
5.3 (3–10)
 Al-Busaidy [9]
BJU International
2004
Oman
28*
26 (14/12)
6.5 (2–12)
12.1 (4–22)
 Thomas [12]
J Urol
2005
USA
33*
29 (15/14)
7.8 (0.4–12)
6 (3–9)
 El-assmy [13]
Journal of Endourology
2006
Egypt
33*
32 (NR)
8.7 (2–15)
7 (4–15)
 Ertuhan [16]
Journal of Endourology
2007
Turkey
41*
41 (16/25)
9.5 (3–15)
5.6 (4–10)
 Corcoran [17]
J Urol
2008
USA
30*
30
9.7 (2.2–14.4)
8.8 (1.5–25)
 Yeow [20]
J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg
2009
Australia
26*
26 (14/12)
8.2 (0.25–15)
10.3 (3–21)
 Chedgy [31]
Urologia Internationalis
2015
UK
32*
21 (13/8)
8.6 (1.4–16)
9.6 (5–20)
 Featherstone [33••]
Journal of Paediatric urology
2016
UK
35*
18 (7/11)
10.4 (3.6–15)
13.2 (10–25)
 Iqbal [35]
Urology
2016
Pakistan
37*
37 (25/12)
8.37 (NR)
10.01 (NR)
 Utangac [36]
JCPSP
2016
Turkey
34*
34 (22/12)
0.8 (0.33–12)
NR
High-volume centres
 Al Busaidy [4]
British Journal of Urology
1997
Oman
50**
43 (29/14)
6.2 (0.5–12)
12.6 (4–22)
 Bassiri [5]
Journal of Endourology
2002
Iran
66**
66 (NR)
9 (2–15)
8 (5–15)
 Minevich [10]
Journal of Urology
2005
USA
81**
71 (39/32)
7.5 (1–12)
NR
 Raza [11]
Journal of Endourology
2005
UK
52**
35 (25/10)
5.9 (0.9–15)
8.8 (3–20)
 Gedik [14]
International Urology and Nephrology
2007
Turkey
54**
54 (32/22)
8.5 (1–16)
7.1 (4–12)
 Smaldone [15]
Journal of Urology
2007
USA
115**
100 (42/58)
13.2
8.3
 Tanaka [18]
Journal of Urology
2008
USA
52**
50 (31/19)
7.9 (1.2–13.6)
8 (1–16)
 Kim [19]
Journal of Urology
2008
USA
170**
167 (89/78)
5.2 (0.25–18)
NR
 Tanriverdi [21]
Paediatric Surgery International
2010
Turkey
65**
65 (39/26)
9.1 (2–16)
6.1 (3–24)
 Turunc [22]
Journal of Endourology
2010
Turkey
66**
61 (NR)
8.1 (0.5–16)
9.5 (3–30)
 Ghazaleh [23]
Saudi Journal of Kidney Diseases and Transplantation
2011
Jordan
78**
56 (38/18)
8.2 (6–14)
8.2 (4–20)
 Nerli [24]
Journal of Endourology
2011
India
88**
80 (69/11)
9.5 (6–12)
12 (9–15)
 Dogan [25•]
Journal of Urology
2011
Turkey
660**
642 (265/377)
7.5 (0.33–17)
10.2 (7–16)
 Yucel [26]
World journal of urology
2011
Turkey
54**
48 (28/20)
7.6 (0.75–18)
8.9 (NR)
 Atar [27]
Urological research
2012
Turkey
69**
64 (23/41)
4.3 (NR)
NR
 Resorlu [28]
Urology
2012
Turkey
95**
95 (53/42)
9.3 (1–17)
14.3 (NR)
 Jurkiewicz [29]
Urolithiasis
2013
Germany
157**
126 (66/60)
7.5 (0.8–17)
7.2
 Ezkurt [30]
Urolithiasis
2013
Turkey
65**
65 (31/34)
4.3 (0.5–7)
14.66 (7–30)
 Sen [32]
Journal of Paediatric urology
2015
Turkey
175**
175 (101/74)
4 (NR)
9.6 (5–20)
 Gokce [34]
Urology
2016
Turkey
116**
116 (78/38)
9.5 (NR)
9.4 (NR)
Other
 Guven [37]
Urology
2016a
Global (over 23 countries)
192
192 (109/83)
10.3 (NR)
4.56 (1.96–9.43)
*Medium volume centre; **High volume centre
aMulticentric study
Overall, 2944 procedures were performed with a mean caseload of 87 procedures per study (range 25–660). There were 13 and 20 studies in the medium-volume [69, 12, 13, 16, 17, 20, 31, 33••, 35, 36] and high-volume [4, 5, 10, 11, 14, 15, 18, 19, 2124, 25•, 2630, 32, 34] groups respectively. Given the paediatric data from the CROES database that was gathered from over 50 centres, it was excluded from this subclassification although the data was used for the overall results [37].

Outcome Measures

All studies reported SFR, with an overall SFR of 90.4% (range 58–100). Medium-volume centres reported a mean SFR of 94.1% (range 87.5–100). High-volume centres reported a mean SFR of 88.1% (range 58–98.5). Mean number of sessions to achieve stone-free status in medium-volume and high-volume groups was 1.1 and 1.2 procedures/patient respectively (Table 2).
Table 2
Results of the studies (stone location, SFR, failure to access and complications)
Author
Stone location (n)
SFR (%)
Failures (n)
Complications (n)
Upper ureter
Mid ureter
Lower ureter
Renal pelvis
Upper pole
Mid pole
Lower pole
Other stones
Medium-volume centres
 Schuster [6]
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
100
0
Stent migration (1), pyelonephritis (1)
 Dogan [7]
2
33
97
1
Ureteric perforation (2)
 Satar [8]
6
3
26
94
2
UTI (1)
 Al-Busaidy [9]
6
5
17
92
2
Transient haematuria (4), fever (2)
 Thomas [12]
3
5
24
1
96
1/33
Extravasation (1)
 El-Assmy [13]
2
2
29
96.9
1/33
Extravasation (1), transient haematuria (1)
 Erturhan [16]
4
15
27
 
87.7
5/41
Nil
 Corcoran [17]
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
94
2/30
Ureteral perforation (2), urinoma (1)
 Yeow [20]
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
88.5
3/26
Nil
 Chedgy [31]
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
95
0
UTI (1)
 Featherstone [33••]
2
5
4
7
3
21
4
89
1
Nil
 Iqbal [35]
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
100
0
Pyelonephritis (2), haematuria (4)
 Utangac [36]
4
9
2
94.1
0
Minimal bleeding (2), ureteral perforation (1), UTI (2)
High-volume centres
 Al Busaidy [4]
9
7
34
93
3/43
Ureteric perforation (2)
 Bassiri [5]
2
5
59
88
3/66
Transient haematuria (11), pyelonephritis (3), renal colic (1)
 Minevich [10]
16
14
28
7
98
0
Nil
 Raza [11]
0
3
72
2
87.2
0
Ureteric perforation (2), urinary retention (1), mild fever (5), mucosal tear (1)
 Gedik [14]
3
16
25
77.8
2
Pyrexia (3)
 Smaldone [15]
19
11
37
6
10
17
91
0
Ureteric perforation/extravasation (5), ureteral stricture (1)
 Tanaka [18]
27
13
11
58
0
Re-admission due to nausea and vomiting (1)
 Kim [19]
47
19
87
14
98.5
0
Nil
 Tanriverdi [21]
5
2
33
89.2
2
Mucosal lacerations (2), minor haematuria (1)
 Turunc [22]
7
9
50
92.4
5
Pyrexia (1)
 Ghazaleh [23]
34
6
4
24
94.8
0
UTI (3), haematuria (1)
 Nerli [24]
56
24
97.5
2
Intra-operative bleeding (6), self-limiting post-operative bleeding (8), pyrexia (4)
 Dogan [25•]
96
73
480
21
90
9/660
Stone migration (8), mucosal laceration (1), broken catheter (1), ureteral perforations (5), haematuria (2) (1 intra-op, 1 post-op), post-op pain (2), febrile UTI (20), urinary retention (1), 1 urethral stone (1), late ureterovesical junction obstruction (4)
 Yucel [26]
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
84.3
8/54
Ureteral perforation (3), urosepsis (30), ureteral obstruction with stone fragment (1)
 Atar [27]
6
9
54
85.6
12
Mild haematuria (8), ureteral laceration (8), ureteric perforation (4), urinoma (1), renal colic (5), febrile UTI (9), urinary retention (7), bleeding/false route/perforation intra-operatively (5)
 Resorlu [28]
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
92.6
0
Minor complications (Clavien I/II) 8.4%
Major complications (Clavien III–V) nil
 Jurkiewicz [29]
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
98.1
4/15
Ureteral perforation (1), ureterovesical stenosis (1)
 Ezkurt [30]
22
10
12
28
92.3
5/65
Pyelonephritis (10), haematuria (6), ureteral wall injury (2)
 Sen [32]
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
66
NR
Fever (30), ureteral laceration (8), sepsis (6)
 Featherstone [33••]
2
5
4
7
3
21
4
89
1
Nil
 Gokce [34]
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
87
3/116
Mucosal injury (8), renal colic (22)
Other
 Guven [37]
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
89.2
NR
Pain (1), stricture (2)
NR not reported
Across all the included studies, the overall complication rate was 11.1% (327/2994). Breakdown by Clavien grade was as follows: Clavien I 69% and Clavien II/III 31% (Table 3). There were no Clavien IV/V complications, and no mortality was recorded across any of the studies.
Table 3
Complications reported in studies from medium-volume and high-volume centres
Nature of complication
Clavien grade
Number of complications (n)
Medium volume
High volume
Post-operative renal colic
I
2
Haematuria
I
9
36
UTI/pyelonephritis
I
4
72
Mild fever/pyrexia post-operatively
I
12
34
Urinary retention
I
1
8
Post-operative renal colic
I
29
Re-admission due to nausea and vomiting
I
1
Urethral stone
I
1
Late ureterovesical junction obstruction
III
5
Stent migration
III
1
8
Ureteral strictures
III
1
Post-operative ureteral stone
III
Broken catheter
III
1
Intra-operative bleeding/false passage/ureteral perforation/tear/laceration/submucosal wire
III
10
63
Stone migration
III
8
Total
37
269
Medium-volume and high-volume studies had overall complication rates of 6.9% (37/530) and 12.1% (287/2222) respectively. There was no significant difference in major or minor complications between these two groups. The overall failure rate was 2.5% (76/2944). Most of them were due to failure to access the paediatric ureter.

Discussion

Findings and Implications of Our Review

This is the largest review on paediatric URS to date and reveals an overall SFR of 90.4% and an overall complication rate of 11.1%. Over two thirds of these complications were Clavien I. Importantly, there was no significant difference in SFR or complication rates between medium-volume and high-volume centres.

PCNL in Paediatric Population

Percutaneous nephrolithomy (PCNL) and shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) represent the key alternative interventions to URS. Whilst the former can achieve high stone-free rates in a single procedure and is not limited by failure to access the ureter such as can occur in URS, it carries a worse morbidity profile, notably in the form of haemorrhagic complications. Bhageria et al. reported transfusion rate of 9% in their retrospective cohort of 95 children undergoing PCNL [38]. Miniaturisation of standard equipment (< 24Fr) has delivered a key strategy for improving its safety status both in adult and paediatric populations. Multiple studies have confirmed higher incidence of haematuria and renal extravasation associated with the use of larger tract sizes [39]. PCNL can now even be delivered in the ‘micro’ format using a 4.5Fr tract with final SFRs reported between 80 and 100% [39]. Its use for treatment of ureteric stones however remains less valuable [40].

SWL in Paediatric Population

Shockwave wave lithotripsy is a minimally invasive option, with a relatively short learning curve and generally minor complications [40]. It has traditionally been the first-line intervention for paediatric stone disease. However, it can necessitate multiple sittings and in children generally requires administration of general anaesthetic. Additionally, SFRs are less predictable with stone recurrences commonly due to incomplete stone clearances [41].
With increased uptake of URS, it looks set to reach an increasing number of endourological milestones. URS has also undergone the miniaturisation process. Utangac et al. recently reported using a micro-ureteroscope (4.5Fr along entire length) in 11 children with a median stone size of 10.5 mm [41]. Stone-free status was achieved in all cases. There were no intra-operative complications and only one case of transient haematuria post-operatively. This novel modification may prove extremely valuable and allow better ureteric cannulation/navigation with fewer cases of access failure. However, further studies are needed comparing it with standard URS.

Limitations of Our Study

Whilst this study represents the largest review to date on paediatric URS, there are certain limitations, which the authors acknowledge. Results have been included from predominantly retrospective studies with age ranges spanning development of the urinary tract from infancy to adult state. The heterogeneity of available evidence did not allow for formal meta-analysis to be performed. In comparison, we did find a relatively higher stone-free rate with lower complications in medium-volume centres. However, we feel that this might reflect higher complexity of cases in established endourology high-volume centres. Similarly, training and guidance on ‘tips and tricks’ of ureteroscopy might help improve outcomes in less well-established paediatric stone centres [42, 43].

Conclusion

URS is a safe and effective treatment for the treatment of stone disease among the paediatric population. Medium-volume centres can achieve equally high SFRs and safety profiles as high-volume centres. The findings of this review may therefore support increased uptake of URS in centres performing fewer procedures each year.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Shazna Rob, Patrick Jones, Amelia Pietropaulo, Stephen Griffin and Bhaskar K. Somani each declare no potential conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Unsere Produktempfehlungen

e.Med Interdisziplinär

Kombi-Abonnement

Für Ihren Erfolg in Klinik und Praxis - Die beste Hilfe in Ihrem Arbeitsalltag

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf SpringerMedizin.de.

e.Med Gynäkologie

Kombi-Abonnement

Mit e.Med Gynäkologie erhalten Sie Zugang zu CME-Fortbildungen der beiden Fachgebiete, den Premium-Inhalten der Fachzeitschriften, inklusive einer gedruckten gynäkologischen oder urologischen Zeitschrift Ihrer Wahl.

e.Med Urologie

Kombi-Abonnement

Mit e.Med Urologie erhalten Sie Zugang zu den urologischen CME-Fortbildungen und Premium-Inhalten der urologischen Fachzeitschriften.

Literatur
2.
Zurück zum Zitat • Geraghty R, Jones P, Somani BK. Worldwide trends of urinary stone disease treatment over the last two decades: a systematic review. J Endourol. 2017;31(6):547–56. This paper shows a growing world-wide trend of intervention for stone disease, which has grown significantly for ureteroscopy over the last two decades CrossRefPubMed • Geraghty R, Jones P, Somani BK. Worldwide trends of urinary stone disease treatment over the last two decades: a systematic review. J Endourol. 2017;31(6):547–56. This paper shows a growing world-wide trend of intervention for stone disease, which has grown significantly for ureteroscopy over the last two decades CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Ritchey M, Patterson DE, Kelalis PP, Segura JW. A case of pediatric ureteroscopic lasertripsy. J Urol. 1988;139(6):1272.CrossRefPubMed Ritchey M, Patterson DE, Kelalis PP, Segura JW. A case of pediatric ureteroscopic lasertripsy. J Urol. 1988;139(6):1272.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Al Busaidy SS, Prem AR, Medhat M. Paediatric ureteroscopy for ureteric calculi: a 4-year experience. Br J Urol. 1997;80:797–801.CrossRefPubMed Al Busaidy SS, Prem AR, Medhat M. Paediatric ureteroscopy for ureteric calculi: a 4-year experience. Br J Urol. 1997;80:797–801.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Bassiri A, Ahmadnia H, Darabi MR. Transureteral lithotripsy in pediatric practice. J Endourol. 2002;16:257–60.CrossRefPubMed Bassiri A, Ahmadnia H, Darabi MR. Transureteral lithotripsy in pediatric practice. J Endourol. 2002;16:257–60.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Schuster TG, Russell KY, Bloom DA. Ureteroscopy for the treatment of urolithiasis in children. J Urol. 2002;167:1813–6.CrossRefPubMed Schuster TG, Russell KY, Bloom DA. Ureteroscopy for the treatment of urolithiasis in children. J Urol. 2002;167:1813–6.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Dogan HS, Tekgul S, Akdogan B. Use of the holmium:YAG laser for ureterolithotripsy in children. BJU Int. 2004;94(1):131–3.CrossRefPubMed Dogan HS, Tekgul S, Akdogan B. Use of the holmium:YAG laser for ureterolithotripsy in children. BJU Int. 2004;94(1):131–3.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Satar N, Zeren S, Bayazit Y. Rigid ureteroscopy for the treatment of ureteral calculi in children. J Urol. 2004;172:298–300.CrossRefPubMed Satar N, Zeren S, Bayazit Y. Rigid ureteroscopy for the treatment of ureteral calculi in children. J Urol. 2004;172:298–300.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Bussaidy A, Prem AR, Medhat M. Ureteric calculi in children: preliminary experience with holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy. BJU Int. 2004;93(9):1318–23.CrossRef Bussaidy A, Prem AR, Medhat M. Ureteric calculi in children: preliminary experience with holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy. BJU Int. 2004;93(9):1318–23.CrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Minevich E, Rousseau MB, Wacksman J. Pediatricureteroscopy: technique and preliminary results. J Pediatr Surg. 1997;32:571–4.CrossRefPubMed Minevich E, Rousseau MB, Wacksman J. Pediatricureteroscopy: technique and preliminary results. J Pediatr Surg. 1997;32:571–4.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Raza A, Smith G, Moussa S. Ureteroscopy in the management of pediatric urinary tract calculi. J Endourol. 2005;19:151–8.CrossRefPubMed Raza A, Smith G, Moussa S. Ureteroscopy in the management of pediatric urinary tract calculi. J Endourol. 2005;19:151–8.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Thomas JC, DeMarco RT, Donohoe JM. Pediatricureteroscopic stone management. J Urol. 2005;174:1072–4.CrossRefPubMed Thomas JC, DeMarco RT, Donohoe JM. Pediatricureteroscopic stone management. J Urol. 2005;174:1072–4.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Assmy EL, Hafez AT, Eraky I. Safety and outcome of rigid ureteroscopy for management of ureteral calculi in children. J Endourol. 2006;20(4):252–5.CrossRefPubMed Assmy EL, Hafez AT, Eraky I. Safety and outcome of rigid ureteroscopy for management of ureteral calculi in children. J Endourol. 2006;20(4):252–5.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Gedik A, Orgen S, Akay AF. Semi-rigid ureterorenoscopy in children without ureteral dilatation. Int Urol Nephrol. 2008;40:11–4.CrossRefPubMed Gedik A, Orgen S, Akay AF. Semi-rigid ureterorenoscopy in children without ureteral dilatation. Int Urol Nephrol. 2008;40:11–4.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Smaldone MC, Cannon GM Jr, Wu HY. Is ureteroscopy first line treatment for pediatric stone disease? J Urol. 2007;178:2128–31.CrossRefPubMed Smaldone MC, Cannon GM Jr, Wu HY. Is ureteroscopy first line treatment for pediatric stone disease? J Urol. 2007;178:2128–31.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Erturhan S, Yağci F, Sarica K. Ureteroscopic management of ureteral calculi in children. J Endourol. 2007;21(4):397–400.PubMed Erturhan S, Yağci F, Sarica K. Ureteroscopic management of ureteral calculi in children. J Endourol. 2007;21(4):397–400.PubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Corcoran AT, Smaldone MC, Mally D, et al. When is prior ureteral stent placement necessary to access the upper urinary tract in prepubertal children? J Urol. 2008;180(4 Suppl):1861e3. Corcoran AT, Smaldone MC, Mally D, et al. When is prior ureteral stent placement necessary to access the upper urinary tract in prepubertal children? J Urol. 2008;180(4 Suppl):1861e3.
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Tanaka ST, Makari JH, Pope JC 4th. Pediatric ureteroscopic management of intrarenal calculi. J Urol. 2008;180:2150–3.CrossRefPubMed Tanaka ST, Makari JH, Pope JC 4th. Pediatric ureteroscopic management of intrarenal calculi. J Urol. 2008;180:2150–3.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Kim SS, Kolon TF, Canter D. Pediatric flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy: the children’s hospital of Philadelphia experience. J Urol. 2008;180:2616–9.CrossRefPubMed Kim SS, Kolon TF, Canter D. Pediatric flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy: the children’s hospital of Philadelphia experience. J Urol. 2008;180:2616–9.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Yeow WC, Pemberton R, Barker A. Flexible ureterorenoscopy and laser lithotripsy in children. J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg. 2009;14(2):63e5. Yeow WC, Pemberton R, Barker A. Flexible ureterorenoscopy and laser lithotripsy in children. J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg. 2009;14(2):63e5.
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Tanriverdi O, Silay MS, Kendirci M. Comparison of ureteroscopic procedures with rigid and semirigid ureteroscopes in pediatric population: does the calibre of instrument matter? Pediatr Surg Int. 2010;26:733–8.CrossRefPubMed Tanriverdi O, Silay MS, Kendirci M. Comparison of ureteroscopic procedures with rigid and semirigid ureteroscopes in pediatric population: does the calibre of instrument matter? Pediatr Surg Int. 2010;26:733–8.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Turunc T, Kuzgunbay B, Gul U. Factors affecting the success of ureteroscopy in management of ureteral stone diseases in children. J Endourol. 2010;24:1273–7.CrossRefPubMed Turunc T, Kuzgunbay B, Gul U. Factors affecting the success of ureteroscopy in management of ureteral stone diseases in children. J Endourol. 2010;24:1273–7.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Ghazaleh LA, Shunaigat AN, Budair Z. Retrograde intrarenal lithotripsy for small renal stones in prepubertal children. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl. 2011;22:492–6.PubMed Ghazaleh LA, Shunaigat AN, Budair Z. Retrograde intrarenal lithotripsy for small renal stones in prepubertal children. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl. 2011;22:492–6.PubMed
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Nerli RB, Patil SM, Guntaka AK. Flexible ureteroscopy for upper ureteral calculi in children. J Endourol. 2011;25:579–82.CrossRefPubMed Nerli RB, Patil SM, Guntaka AK. Flexible ureteroscopy for upper ureteral calculi in children. J Endourol. 2011;25:579–82.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Zurück zum Zitat • Dogan HS, Onal B, Satar N. Factors affecting the complication rates of ureteroscopic lithotripsy in children: results of multi-institutional retrospective analysis by Pediatric Stone Disease Study Group of Turkish Pediatric Urology Society. J Urol. 2011;186:1035–40. One of the largest papers on paediatric ureteroscopy, which shows operative time as an important predictor of complications in paediatric stones CrossRefPubMed • Dogan HS, Onal B, Satar N. Factors affecting the complication rates of ureteroscopic lithotripsy in children: results of multi-institutional retrospective analysis by Pediatric Stone Disease Study Group of Turkish Pediatric Urology Society. J Urol. 2011;186:1035–40. One of the largest papers on paediatric ureteroscopy, which shows operative time as an important predictor of complications in paediatric stones CrossRefPubMed
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Yucel S, Akin Y, Kol A. Experience on semirigid ureteroscopy and pneumatic lithotripsy in children at a single center. Worl J Urol. 2011;29(6):719–23.CrossRef Yucel S, Akin Y, Kol A. Experience on semirigid ureteroscopy and pneumatic lithotripsy in children at a single center. Worl J Urol. 2011;29(6):719–23.CrossRef
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Atar M, Bodakci MN, Sancaktutar AA. Comparison of pneumatic and laser lithotripsy in the treatment of pediatric ureteral stones. J Pediatr Urol. 2013;9:308–12.CrossRefPubMed Atar M, Bodakci MN, Sancaktutar AA. Comparison of pneumatic and laser lithotripsy in the treatment of pediatric ureteral stones. J Pediatr Urol. 2013;9:308–12.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Resorlu B, Unsal A, Tepeler A. Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children with moderate-size kidney stones: results of multi-institutional analysis. Urology. 2012;80(3):519e23. Resorlu B, Unsal A, Tepeler A. Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children with moderate-size kidney stones: results of multi-institutional analysis. Urology. 2012;80(3):519e23.
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Jurkiewicz B, Ząbkowski T, Samotyjek J. Ureterolithotripsy in a paediatric population: a single institution's experience. Urolithiasis. 2014;42(2):171–6.CrossRefPubMed Jurkiewicz B, Ząbkowski T, Samotyjek J. Ureterolithotripsy in a paediatric population: a single institution's experience. Urolithiasis. 2014;42(2):171–6.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Erkurt B, Caskurlu T, Atis G. Treatment of renal stones with flexible ureteroscopy in preschool are children. Urolithiasis. 2014;42(3):241e5.CrossRef Erkurt B, Caskurlu T, Atis G. Treatment of renal stones with flexible ureteroscopy in preschool are children. Urolithiasis. 2014;42(3):241e5.CrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Chedgy ECP, Griffin SJ, Dyer JP et al. Ureteroscopy for paediatric renal tract stones—outcomes from a tertiary European centre. Urol Int 2015;95(3):320–3. Chedgy ECP, Griffin SJ, Dyer JP et al. Ureteroscopy for paediatric renal tract stones—outcomes from a tertiary European centre. Urol Int 2015;95(3):320–3.
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Sen H, Seckiner I, Bayrak O, et al. Treatment alternatives for urinary system stone disease in preschool aged children: results of 616 cases. J Pediatric Urol. 2015;11(1):44.e1–34.e5.CrossRef Sen H, Seckiner I, Bayrak O, et al. Treatment alternatives for urinary system stone disease in preschool aged children: results of 616 cases. J Pediatric Urol. 2015;11(1):44.e1–34.e5.CrossRef
33.
Zurück zum Zitat •• Featherstone NC, Somani BK, Griffin SJ. Ureteroscopy and laser stone fragmentation (URSL) for large (≥ 1 cm) paediatric stones: outcomes from a university teaching hospital. J Pediatr Urol. 2016 Aug 24. This paper shows the role of ureteroscopy for large stones in paediatric patients with excellent outcomes and is a benchmark paper for treatment of large paediatric stones. •• Featherstone NC, Somani BK, Griffin SJ. Ureteroscopy and laser stone fragmentation (URSL) for large (≥ 1 cm) paediatric stones: outcomes from a university teaching hospital. J Pediatr Urol. 2016 Aug 24. This paper shows the role of ureteroscopy for large stones in paediatric patients with excellent outcomes and is a benchmark paper for treatment of large paediatric stones.
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Gökce MI, Telli O, Özkıdık M, et al. Evaluation of postoperative hydronephrosis following ureteroscopy in pediatric population: incidence and predictors. Urology. 2016;93:164–9.CrossRefPubMed Gökce MI, Telli O, Özkıdık M, et al. Evaluation of postoperative hydronephrosis following ureteroscopy in pediatric population: incidence and predictors. Urology. 2016;93:164–9.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Iqbal N, Hussain I, Waqar S, et al. Ureteroscopy for management of ureteric stones in children–a single centre experience. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak: JCPSP. 2016;26(12):984–8.PubMed Iqbal N, Hussain I, Waqar S, et al. Ureteroscopy for management of ureteric stones in children–a single centre experience. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak: JCPSP. 2016;26(12):984–8.PubMed
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Utanğaç MM, et al. Effectiveness of ureteroscopy among the youngest patients: one centre’s experience in an endemic region in Turkey. J Pediatr Urol. 2017;13(1):37–e1.PubMed Utanğaç MM, et al. Effectiveness of ureteroscopy among the youngest patients: one centre’s experience in an endemic region in Turkey. J Pediatr Urol. 2017;13(1):37–e1.PubMed
37.
Zurück zum Zitat Guven S, Basiri A, Varshney AK, et al. Examining pediatric cases from the clinical research office of the Endourological Society Ureteroscopy Global Study. Urology. 2017;101:31–7.CrossRefPubMed Guven S, Basiri A, Varshney AK, et al. Examining pediatric cases from the clinical research office of the Endourological Society Ureteroscopy Global Study. Urology. 2017;101:31–7.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Zurück zum Zitat Bhageria A, Nayak B, Seth A. Paediatric percutaneous nephrolithotomy: single-centre 10-year experience. J Pediatr Urol. 2013;9:472–5.CrossRefPubMed Bhageria A, Nayak B, Seth A. Paediatric percutaneous nephrolithotomy: single-centre 10-year experience. J Pediatr Urol. 2013;9:472–5.CrossRefPubMed
40.
41.
Zurück zum Zitat Utanğaç MM, Sancaktutar AA, Tepeler A. Micro-ureteroscopy for the treatment of distal ureteral calculi in children. J Pediatr Surg. 2017;52(3):512–6.CrossRefPubMed Utanğaç MM, Sancaktutar AA, Tepeler A. Micro-ureteroscopy for the treatment of distal ureteral calculi in children. J Pediatr Surg. 2017;52(3):512–6.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Zurück zum Zitat Rukin NJ, Somani BK, Patterson J, et al. Tips and tricks of ureteroscopy: consensus statement Part II. Advanced ureteroscopy. Cent Eur J Urol. 2016;69(1):98–104. Rukin NJ, Somani BK, Patterson J, et al. Tips and tricks of ureteroscopy: consensus statement Part II. Advanced ureteroscopy. Cent Eur J Urol. 2016;69(1):98–104.
Metadaten
Titel
Ureteroscopy for Stone Disease in Paediatric Population is Safe and Effective in Medium-Volume and High-Volume Centres: Evidence from a Systematic Review
verfasst von
Shazna Rob
Patrick Jones
Amelia Pietropaolo
Stephen Griffin
Bhaskar K. Somani
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2017
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Current Urology Reports / Ausgabe 12/2017
Print ISSN: 1527-2737
Elektronische ISSN: 1534-6285
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-017-0742-3

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 12/2017

Current Urology Reports 12/2017 Zur Ausgabe

New Imaging Techniques (S Rais-Bahrami and A George, Section Editors)

A Review of Imaging Modalities Used in the Diagnosis and Management of Scrotal Trauma

Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (K McVary, Section Editor)

Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate: Patient Selection and Outcomes

Darf man die Behandlung eines Neonazis ablehnen?

08.05.2024 Gesellschaft Nachrichten

In einer Leseranfrage in der Zeitschrift Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology möchte ein anonymer Dermatologe bzw. eine anonyme Dermatologin wissen, ob er oder sie einen Patienten behandeln muss, der eine rassistische Tätowierung trägt.

Hypertherme Chemotherapie bietet Chance auf Blasenerhalt

07.05.2024 Harnblasenkarzinom Nachrichten

Eine hypertherme intravesikale Chemotherapie mit Mitomycin kann für Patienten mit hochriskantem nicht muskelinvasivem Blasenkrebs eine Alternative zur radikalen Zystektomie darstellen. Kölner Urologen berichten über ihre Erfahrungen.

Ein Drittel der jungen Ärztinnen und Ärzte erwägt abzuwandern

07.05.2024 Klinik aktuell Nachrichten

Extreme Arbeitsverdichtung und kaum Supervision: Dr. Andrea Martini, Sprecherin des Bündnisses Junge Ärztinnen und Ärzte (BJÄ) über den Frust des ärztlichen Nachwuchses und die Vorteile des Rucksack-Modells.

Männern mit Zystitis Schmalband-Antibiotika verordnen

03.05.2024 Zystitis Nachrichten

Die akute Zystitis von Männern und ihre Therapie sind wenig erforscht. Norwegische Forscher haben das nachgeholt. Ihr Rat: Erst einmal keine Breitbandantibiotika verordnen.

Update Urologie

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