Optimal stenting duration following ureteroscopy and nephrolithotomy: systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Introduction The optimal duration for ureteral stent placement following ureteroscopy remains unclear, with no consensus on its impact on patient outcomes. This study aims to evaluate the ideal stent duration by comparing post-procedure-related events (PREs) and complications. Methods A com...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Breno C. Porto, Nathalie. C. hobaica, Carlo C. Passerotti, Rodrigo A. S. Sardenberg, Jose P. Otoch, Jose Arnaldo Shiomi da Cruz
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2025-04-01
Series:BMC Urology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-025-01765-z
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850202602366566400
author Breno C. Porto
Nathalie. C. hobaica
Carlo C. Passerotti
Rodrigo A. S. Sardenberg
Jose P. Otoch
Jose Arnaldo Shiomi da Cruz
author_facet Breno C. Porto
Nathalie. C. hobaica
Carlo C. Passerotti
Rodrigo A. S. Sardenberg
Jose P. Otoch
Jose Arnaldo Shiomi da Cruz
author_sort Breno C. Porto
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Introduction The optimal duration for ureteral stent placement following ureteroscopy remains unclear, with no consensus on its impact on patient outcomes. This study aims to evaluate the ideal stent duration by comparing post-procedure-related events (PREs) and complications. Methods A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Google Scholar identified studies comparing different durations of ureteral stenting after ureteroscopy. The primary outcome was the occurrence of PREs, while secondary outcomes focused on associated complications. Results Four studies were included, encompassing 1762 patients with stents removed with ≤ 5 days and 2231 patients with stents removed with ≥ 6 days. The incidence of PREs did not significantly differ between the two groups (OR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.22–7.25; p = 0.79; I² = 98%). Patients with stent durations ≥ 6 days had higher rates of flank pain and hematuria. In contrast, fever and dysuria were more prevalent in patients with stents removed within 5 days. Conclusion Although no significant difference was observed in overall PRE rates, the distinct patterns of complications based on stent duration highlight the complexity of determining optimal stent placement time in clinical practice.
format Article
id doaj-art-fa3d9d1cdb9a40cda1d25b78c38d16dc
institution OA Journals
issn 1471-2490
language English
publishDate 2025-04-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series BMC Urology
spelling doaj-art-fa3d9d1cdb9a40cda1d25b78c38d16dc2025-08-20T02:11:42ZengBMCBMC Urology1471-24902025-04-0125111110.1186/s12894-025-01765-zOptimal stenting duration following ureteroscopy and nephrolithotomy: systematic review and meta-analysisBreno C. Porto0Nathalie. C. hobaica1Carlo C. Passerotti2Rodrigo A. S. Sardenberg3Jose P. Otoch4Jose Arnaldo Shiomi da Cruz5Surgical Technique and Experimental Surgery Department, University of São Paulo School of MedicineSurgical Technique and Experimental Surgery Department, University of São Paulo School of MedicineSurgical Technique and Experimental Surgery Department, University of São Paulo School of MedicineInternational Teaching and Research Institute - Hapvida NotreDame IntermédicaSurgical Technique and Experimental Surgery Department, University of São Paulo School of MedicineSurgical Technique and Experimental Surgery Department, University of São Paulo School of MedicineAbstract Introduction The optimal duration for ureteral stent placement following ureteroscopy remains unclear, with no consensus on its impact on patient outcomes. This study aims to evaluate the ideal stent duration by comparing post-procedure-related events (PREs) and complications. Methods A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Google Scholar identified studies comparing different durations of ureteral stenting after ureteroscopy. The primary outcome was the occurrence of PREs, while secondary outcomes focused on associated complications. Results Four studies were included, encompassing 1762 patients with stents removed with ≤ 5 days and 2231 patients with stents removed with ≥ 6 days. The incidence of PREs did not significantly differ between the two groups (OR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.22–7.25; p = 0.79; I² = 98%). Patients with stent durations ≥ 6 days had higher rates of flank pain and hematuria. In contrast, fever and dysuria were more prevalent in patients with stents removed within 5 days. Conclusion Although no significant difference was observed in overall PRE rates, the distinct patterns of complications based on stent duration highlight the complexity of determining optimal stent placement time in clinical practice.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-025-01765-zStentUreterUreteroscopyPercutaneous nephrolithotomy
spellingShingle Breno C. Porto
Nathalie. C. hobaica
Carlo C. Passerotti
Rodrigo A. S. Sardenberg
Jose P. Otoch
Jose Arnaldo Shiomi da Cruz
Optimal stenting duration following ureteroscopy and nephrolithotomy: systematic review and meta-analysis
BMC Urology
Stent
Ureter
Ureteroscopy
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy
title Optimal stenting duration following ureteroscopy and nephrolithotomy: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Optimal stenting duration following ureteroscopy and nephrolithotomy: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Optimal stenting duration following ureteroscopy and nephrolithotomy: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Optimal stenting duration following ureteroscopy and nephrolithotomy: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Optimal stenting duration following ureteroscopy and nephrolithotomy: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort optimal stenting duration following ureteroscopy and nephrolithotomy systematic review and meta analysis
topic Stent
Ureter
Ureteroscopy
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-025-01765-z
work_keys_str_mv AT brenocporto optimalstentingdurationfollowingureteroscopyandnephrolithotomysystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT nathaliechobaica optimalstentingdurationfollowingureteroscopyandnephrolithotomysystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT carlocpasserotti optimalstentingdurationfollowingureteroscopyandnephrolithotomysystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT rodrigoassardenberg optimalstentingdurationfollowingureteroscopyandnephrolithotomysystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT josepotoch optimalstentingdurationfollowingureteroscopyandnephrolithotomysystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT josearnaldoshiomidacruz optimalstentingdurationfollowingureteroscopyandnephrolithotomysystematicreviewandmetaanalysis