Comparison of Magnetic and Conventional Double-J Stent Following Kidney Transplantation: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

IF 1.9 Q3 TRANSPLANTATION
Transplantation Direct Pub Date : 2025-03-10 eCollection Date: 2025-04-01 DOI:10.1097/TXD.0000000000001773
Maximilian Glienke, Marc Kunzelmann, August Sigle, Christian Gratzke, Arkadiusz Miernik, Sebastian Claes, Bernd Jänigen, Philippe-Fabian Pohlmann
{"title":"Comparison of Magnetic and Conventional Double-J Stent Following Kidney Transplantation: A Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Maximilian Glienke, Marc Kunzelmann, August Sigle, Christian Gratzke, Arkadiusz Miernik, Sebastian Claes, Bernd Jänigen, Philippe-Fabian Pohlmann","doi":"10.1097/TXD.0000000000001773","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This monocentric, randomized controlled trial aims to compare the outcomes of kidney transplant recipients with magnetic double-J (DJ) stents versus conventional DJ stents. Specifically, we assessed stent-related symptoms, procedural difficulties, pain and duration of removal, and associated costs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 30 patients were randomly assigned to receive either a magnetic DJ (mDJ) stent or a conventional, standard DJ (sDJ) stent during kidney transplantation using the Lich-Gregoir technique. Quality of life was evaluated with the USSQ 7-10 d postoperation. sDJs stents were removed cystoscopically by a urologist while mDJ stents were removed bedside by a transplant surgeon. The duration of removal and procedure-associated pain were documented. Questionnaires for physicians and patients were used to assess peri-interventional experience and issues. Additionally, costs associated with the removal of both stents were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Quality of life showed no differences between the groups. Stent removal was successful in all cases, with no differences in duration of removal (<i>P</i> = 0.24) or major issues. Patients reported comparable pain levels during the removal of mDJs (<i>P</i> = 0.55) and higher satisfaction, although this was not statistically significant (<i>P</i> = 0.27). Cost analysis revealed a reduction of approximately €172 with the use of mDJ.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The use of mDJ stents in kidney transplantation is a safe alternative associated with comparable pain during removal. Additionally, it offers cost savings and reduces the logistical burden for both patients and hospitals.</p>","PeriodicalId":23225,"journal":{"name":"Transplantation Direct","volume":"11 4","pages":"e1773"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11896100/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transplantation Direct","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TXD.0000000000001773","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"TRANSPLANTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This monocentric, randomized controlled trial aims to compare the outcomes of kidney transplant recipients with magnetic double-J (DJ) stents versus conventional DJ stents. Specifically, we assessed stent-related symptoms, procedural difficulties, pain and duration of removal, and associated costs.

Methods: A total of 30 patients were randomly assigned to receive either a magnetic DJ (mDJ) stent or a conventional, standard DJ (sDJ) stent during kidney transplantation using the Lich-Gregoir technique. Quality of life was evaluated with the USSQ 7-10 d postoperation. sDJs stents were removed cystoscopically by a urologist while mDJ stents were removed bedside by a transplant surgeon. The duration of removal and procedure-associated pain were documented. Questionnaires for physicians and patients were used to assess peri-interventional experience and issues. Additionally, costs associated with the removal of both stents were analyzed.

Results: Quality of life showed no differences between the groups. Stent removal was successful in all cases, with no differences in duration of removal (P = 0.24) or major issues. Patients reported comparable pain levels during the removal of mDJs (P = 0.55) and higher satisfaction, although this was not statistically significant (P = 0.27). Cost analysis revealed a reduction of approximately €172 with the use of mDJ.

Conclusions: The use of mDJ stents in kidney transplantation is a safe alternative associated with comparable pain during removal. Additionally, it offers cost savings and reduces the logistical burden for both patients and hospitals.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Transplantation Direct
Transplantation Direct TRANSPLANTATION-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
4.30%
发文量
193
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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