Comparison of single and tandem ureteral stenting for malignant ureteral obstruction: a prospective study of 104 patients
European Radiology, ISSN: 1432-1084, Vol: 29, Issue: 2, Page: 628-635
2019
- 22Citations
- 44Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations22
- Citation Indexes21
- 21
- CrossRef11
- Policy Citations1
- 1
- Captures44
- Readers44
- 44
Article Description
Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare single and tandem ureteral stenting in the management of malignant ureteral obstruction (MUO). Methods: Our hospital’s institutional review board approved this prospective study. Between November 2014 and June 2017, single ureteral stenting was performed in 56 patients (94 renal units) and tandem ureteral stenting in 48 patients (63 renal units) for MUO. A comparative analysis of the technical success rate, patient survival, stent patency, and complications was performed. Results: Similar demographic data were observed in patients receiving either single or tandem ureteral stenting. The technical success rate was 93.6% (88/94) for single ureteral stenting and 95.2% (60/63) for tandem ureteral stenting. There was no difference in overall survival between patients receiving single or tandem ureteral stenting (p = 0.41), but the duration of stent patency in tandem ureteral stenting was significantly longer (p = 0.022). The mean patency time was 176.7 ± 21.3 days for single ureteral stenting, and 214.7 ± 21.0 days for tandem ureteral stenting. The complications of ureteral stenting were urinary tract infection (n = 18), lower urinary tract symptoms (n = 5), haematuria (n = 3), and stent migration (n = 1). Conclusions: Tandem ureteral stenting is a safe and feasible treatment for MUO, and had better efficacy compared to single ureteral stenting. Key Points: • Ureteral stenting is an established treatment for the management of malignant ureteral obstruction (MUO) • Prospective single-centre study showed that tandem ureteral stenting is a safe and feasible treatment for MUO • Tandem ureteral stenting provides longer stent patency compared to single ureteral stenting in patient with MUO.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85049568412&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5560-6; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29974220; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00330-018-5560-6; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5560-6; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00330-018-5560-6
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know