Ureteral stenting in the clinic: a safe and cost-effective alternative to the operating room.

IF 1.5 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Zachary M Connelly, Ann Stolzle, Robert August Vanlangendonck, Wybra Joey Price, Kevin Morgan, Nazih Khater
{"title":"Ureteral stenting in the clinic: a safe and cost-effective alternative to the operating room.","authors":"Zachary M Connelly,&nbsp;Ann Stolzle,&nbsp;Robert August Vanlangendonck,&nbsp;Wybra Joey Price,&nbsp;Kevin Morgan,&nbsp;Nazih Khater","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Ureteral stent placement is one of the most common procedures performed by urologists, and is typically done in the operating room. At Ochsner-LSU Health Shreveport, urologists have a unique setting allowing them to place ureteral stents for patients present in the outpatient ambulatory clinic without the need for nitrous oxide. This allows patients to avoid being admitted to the hospital and receiving subsequent general anesthesia in the operating room. Therefore, our novel study evaluates the feasibility, safety, and cost-effectiveness of ureteral stents insertion in the clinic.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>In this study, we analyzed 240 patients with a total of 279 different ureteral stent insertion encounters to evaluate the safety and costs of stenting in the clinic compared to the operating room. Stents were placed in the outpatient clinic for 126 patients, which required either a new ureteral stent insertion or a scheduled stent exchange.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, there was an increased age and length of stent duration among those who were stented in the clinic. We did not observe any increase in narcotics use, pain, adverse injuries, or differences in stent length. The total cost of a stent insertion operating room was $16,349.91 whereas the clinic procedure cost $7,865.69, however: medicare reimbursement remained the same.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings demonstrate a novel use of stenting in the clinic is feasible as an outpatient alternative. It is a safe alternative to the operating room, and more cost-effective.</p>","PeriodicalId":7438,"journal":{"name":"American journal of clinical and experimental urology","volume":"11 4","pages":"304-311"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10461035/pdf/ajceu0011-0304.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of clinical and experimental urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Ureteral stent placement is one of the most common procedures performed by urologists, and is typically done in the operating room. At Ochsner-LSU Health Shreveport, urologists have a unique setting allowing them to place ureteral stents for patients present in the outpatient ambulatory clinic without the need for nitrous oxide. This allows patients to avoid being admitted to the hospital and receiving subsequent general anesthesia in the operating room. Therefore, our novel study evaluates the feasibility, safety, and cost-effectiveness of ureteral stents insertion in the clinic.

Material and methods: In this study, we analyzed 240 patients with a total of 279 different ureteral stent insertion encounters to evaluate the safety and costs of stenting in the clinic compared to the operating room. Stents were placed in the outpatient clinic for 126 patients, which required either a new ureteral stent insertion or a scheduled stent exchange.

Results: Overall, there was an increased age and length of stent duration among those who were stented in the clinic. We did not observe any increase in narcotics use, pain, adverse injuries, or differences in stent length. The total cost of a stent insertion operating room was $16,349.91 whereas the clinic procedure cost $7,865.69, however: medicare reimbursement remained the same.

Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate a novel use of stenting in the clinic is feasible as an outpatient alternative. It is a safe alternative to the operating room, and more cost-effective.

输尿管支架置入术在临床:一个安全的和经济的替代手术室。
目的:输尿管支架置入是泌尿科医生最常见的手术之一,通常在手术室进行。在奥克斯纳-路易斯安那州立大学什里夫波特健康中心,泌尿科医生有一个独特的环境,允许他们为门诊门诊的病人放置输尿管支架,而不需要使用氧化亚氮。这使得患者可以避免住院并在手术室接受全身麻醉。因此,我们的新研究评估输尿管支架置入临床的可行性、安全性和成本效益。材料和方法:在本研究中,我们分析了240例患者共279种不同输尿管支架置入遭遇,以评估临床与手术室支架置入的安全性和成本。126例患者在门诊放置了支架,这些患者要么需要新的输尿管支架置入,要么需要预定的支架置换。结果:总体而言,在临床接受支架治疗的患者中,年龄和支架持续时间都有所增加。我们没有观察到麻醉剂使用、疼痛、不良损伤或支架长度的差异有任何增加。一间支架植入手术室的总费用为16349.91美元,而门诊手术的费用为7865.69美元,然而,医疗保险报销保持不变。结论:我们的研究结果表明,一种新型的支架植入术在临床上是可行的。这是一个安全的替代手术室,更具有成本效益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
8.30%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信