The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Outcomes of elective ureteroscopy for ureteric stones in patients with prior urosepsis and emergency drainage: prospective study over 5 yr from a tertiary endourology centre

Outcomes of elective ureteroscopy for ureteric stones in patients with prior urosepsis and emergency drainage: prospective study over 5 yr from a tertiary endourology centre
Outcomes of elective ureteroscopy for ureteric stones in patients with prior urosepsis and emergency drainage: prospective study over 5 yr from a tertiary endourology centre

BACKGROUND: Elective treatment of ureteric stones is needed after emergency drainage of urosepsis.

OBJECTIVE: We wanted to look at the outcomes of elective ureteroscopic stone treatment in patients with prior sepsis and emergency drainage via retrograde ureteric stent (RUS) or percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data of all patients who underwent elective ureteroscopy (URS) for stone disease over 5 yr (March 2012-December 2016) were prospectively collected.

INTERVENTION: Elective URS following previous emergency RUS or PCN.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Outcomes were collated for consecutive patients who underwent emergency drainage for urosepsis secondary to stone disease, followed by elective URS. Data was collected regarding patient demographics, stone parameters, and clinical outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 24.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In total, 76 patients underwent 82 elective procedures (six underwent bilateral URS) with a male to female ratio of 1:2 and a mean age of 57 yr. Emergency decompression was achieved via RUS in 63 (83%) and PCN in 13 (17%) patients. A positive urine culture on presentation was obtained in 26 (34%) patients, and 27 (36%) patients were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). The mean single and overall stone size was 8.6 (2-23) and 10.8 (2-32) mm, respectively. The mean operating time was 42 (5-129) min with stone-free rate (SFR) of 97% (n=74). There were three (4%) complications in total, of which two patients developed urinary tract infection needing intravenous antibiotics (Clavien II) and a third developed sepsis (Clavien IV) needing ICU admission. There was no difference in ureteroscopic lithotripsy outcomes (operative time, complications, or SFR) on comparing initial RUS or PCN, admission to ICU or ward, positive or negative urine culture result, presence of single or multiple stones, and between American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade of patients. The ASA grade of patients was a significant predictor of day case procedures (p=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: Elective URS achieved excellent outcomes in patients who previously presented with obstructing calculi and sepsis needing emergency decompression. Overnight inpatient admission was needed in some patients with a higher ASA grade.

PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we look at the outcomes of planned ureteroscopy procedures for stone disease in patients with previous urosepsis. These patients with previous emergency drainage for urosepsis had excellent outcomes from their planned ureteroscopic surgery. This information will help in preoperative patient optimisation and counselling.

Nephrostomy, Outcomes, Sepsis, Stent, Stone, Ureteroscopy
Pietropaolo, Amelia
dd6770c4-bf2e-46a9-b7a2-7bd3f9fdba56
Hendry, Jane
d8e3a6a9-04c0-4103-bffb-dcf6678c0c53
Kyriakides, Rena
fe2879db-c913-4282-8da2-d6c15f01959b
Geraghty, Robert
ef19149e-530f-4749-9740-0902fed96fe1
Jones, Patrick
d27beb5b-0e09-4ed5-89f0-6c62421c2397
Aboumarzouk, Omar
3c7e2433-638d-4378-9931-902fdc68acce
Somani, Bhaskar K.
ab5fd1ce-02df-4b88-b25e-8ece396335d9
Pietropaolo, Amelia
dd6770c4-bf2e-46a9-b7a2-7bd3f9fdba56
Hendry, Jane
d8e3a6a9-04c0-4103-bffb-dcf6678c0c53
Kyriakides, Rena
fe2879db-c913-4282-8da2-d6c15f01959b
Geraghty, Robert
ef19149e-530f-4749-9740-0902fed96fe1
Jones, Patrick
d27beb5b-0e09-4ed5-89f0-6c62421c2397
Aboumarzouk, Omar
3c7e2433-638d-4378-9931-902fdc68acce
Somani, Bhaskar K.
ab5fd1ce-02df-4b88-b25e-8ece396335d9

Pietropaolo, Amelia, Hendry, Jane, Kyriakides, Rena, Geraghty, Robert, Jones, Patrick, Aboumarzouk, Omar and Somani, Bhaskar K. (2018) Outcomes of elective ureteroscopy for ureteric stones in patients with prior urosepsis and emergency drainage: prospective study over 5 yr from a tertiary endourology centre. European Urology Focus. (doi:10.1016/j.euf.2018.09.001).

Record type: Article

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Elective treatment of ureteric stones is needed after emergency drainage of urosepsis.

OBJECTIVE: We wanted to look at the outcomes of elective ureteroscopic stone treatment in patients with prior sepsis and emergency drainage via retrograde ureteric stent (RUS) or percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data of all patients who underwent elective ureteroscopy (URS) for stone disease over 5 yr (March 2012-December 2016) were prospectively collected.

INTERVENTION: Elective URS following previous emergency RUS or PCN.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Outcomes were collated for consecutive patients who underwent emergency drainage for urosepsis secondary to stone disease, followed by elective URS. Data was collected regarding patient demographics, stone parameters, and clinical outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 24.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In total, 76 patients underwent 82 elective procedures (six underwent bilateral URS) with a male to female ratio of 1:2 and a mean age of 57 yr. Emergency decompression was achieved via RUS in 63 (83%) and PCN in 13 (17%) patients. A positive urine culture on presentation was obtained in 26 (34%) patients, and 27 (36%) patients were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). The mean single and overall stone size was 8.6 (2-23) and 10.8 (2-32) mm, respectively. The mean operating time was 42 (5-129) min with stone-free rate (SFR) of 97% (n=74). There were three (4%) complications in total, of which two patients developed urinary tract infection needing intravenous antibiotics (Clavien II) and a third developed sepsis (Clavien IV) needing ICU admission. There was no difference in ureteroscopic lithotripsy outcomes (operative time, complications, or SFR) on comparing initial RUS or PCN, admission to ICU or ward, positive or negative urine culture result, presence of single or multiple stones, and between American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade of patients. The ASA grade of patients was a significant predictor of day case procedures (p=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: Elective URS achieved excellent outcomes in patients who previously presented with obstructing calculi and sepsis needing emergency decompression. Overnight inpatient admission was needed in some patients with a higher ASA grade.

PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we look at the outcomes of planned ureteroscopy procedures for stone disease in patients with previous urosepsis. These patients with previous emergency drainage for urosepsis had excellent outcomes from their planned ureteroscopic surgery. This information will help in preoperative patient optimisation and counselling.

Text
Urosepsis - PCN vs RUS - Proof
Restricted to Repository staff only
Request a copy

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 5 September 2018
e-pub ahead of print date: 13 September 2018
Keywords: Nephrostomy, Outcomes, Sepsis, Stent, Stone, Ureteroscopy

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 423699
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/423699
PURE UUID: 481a7ad6-be1a-4891-85ee-0ac28c5363f1

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 27 Sep 2018 16:30
Last modified: 07 Oct 2020 00:50

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Amelia Pietropaolo
Author: Jane Hendry
Author: Rena Kyriakides
Author: Robert Geraghty
Author: Patrick Jones
Author: Omar Aboumarzouk

University divisions

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×