Scholarlink

Purpose <p>Encrustation due to forgotten ureteral stents is one of the challenging and complication-prone conditions in urology. In this study, we aimed to determine the factors affecting the development of encrustation in cases of forgotten stents and to compare the existing encrustation classifications (KUB, V-GUES, FECal).</p> Methods <p>Between 2010 and 2024, 85 patients (56 males) who had ureteral stents placed for urinary and oncological reasons but whose removal was forgotten due to interrupted follow-ups and who were therefore planned for treatment were retrospectively analysed. Cases were grouped into those where the stent was encrusted (Group 1) and those where it was not encrusted (Group 2) based on the imaging results. Clinical, laboratory, and radiological data were collected and compared. In cases with encrustation, KUB, V-GUES, and FECal scores were calculated and evaluated for correlation. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 25, and the significance level was set at p&lt;0.05.</p> Results <p>The mean age was 48.9 years, and the average stent dwell time was 14.6 months. Encrustation was observed in 54 patients. No significant differences were found between groups regarding age, sex, stent laterality or dwell time (p&gt;0.05). The mean stone Hounsfield unit (HU) was significantly lower in the encrustation group in both univariate and multivariate analyses (610.2 and 883.7) (p&lt;0.001, 0.003). The mean ureteral diameter was higher in encrustation cases (9.1 and 6.1 mm) (p&lt;0.001, 0.002). Urinary pH was significantly lower in patients with incrustation, but no significant difference was observed in multivariate analysis (5.7) (p&lt;0.001, 0.202). ROC analysis demonstrated that HU, ureteral diameter, and urine pH were significant predictors of encrustation (AUC: 0.847, 0.812, and 0.769, respectively). KUB score showed strong correlation with both V-GUES (r=0.872) and FECal (r=0.834) (p&lt;0.001).</p> Conclusion <p>Ureteral stents placed after procedures involving low-HU stones carry a greater risk of becoming encrusted. Among the classification systems, KUB's correlation and predictive utility are paramount.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Investigation of current markers in predicting forgotten ureteral stent encrustation, accompanied by KUB, V-GUES and fecal scoring. here is the dilemma: does every forgotten stent become encrusted?

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月11日

查看全文
  • Alper Coşkun,
  • Erdinç Dinçer,
  • Cengiz Çanakçı,
  • Osman Murat İpek,
  • Medet Sevinç,
  • Utku Can,
  • Orkunt Özkaptan

摘要

Purpose

Encrustation due to forgotten ureteral stents is one of the challenging and complication-prone conditions in urology. In this study, we aimed to determine the factors affecting the development of encrustation in cases of forgotten stents and to compare the existing encrustation classifications (KUB, V-GUES, FECal).

Methods

Between 2010 and 2024, 85 patients (56 males) who had ureteral stents placed for urinary and oncological reasons but whose removal was forgotten due to interrupted follow-ups and who were therefore planned for treatment were retrospectively analysed. Cases were grouped into those where the stent was encrusted (Group 1) and those where it was not encrusted (Group 2) based on the imaging results. Clinical, laboratory, and radiological data were collected and compared. In cases with encrustation, KUB, V-GUES, and FECal scores were calculated and evaluated for correlation. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 25, and the significance level was set at p<0.05.

Results

The mean age was 48.9 years, and the average stent dwell time was 14.6 months. Encrustation was observed in 54 patients. No significant differences were found between groups regarding age, sex, stent laterality or dwell time (p>0.05). The mean stone Hounsfield unit (HU) was significantly lower in the encrustation group in both univariate and multivariate analyses (610.2 and 883.7) (p<0.001, 0.003). The mean ureteral diameter was higher in encrustation cases (9.1 and 6.1 mm) (p<0.001, 0.002). Urinary pH was significantly lower in patients with incrustation, but no significant difference was observed in multivariate analysis (5.7) (p<0.001, 0.202). ROC analysis demonstrated that HU, ureteral diameter, and urine pH were significant predictors of encrustation (AUC: 0.847, 0.812, and 0.769, respectively). KUB score showed strong correlation with both V-GUES (r=0.872) and FECal (r=0.834) (p<0.001).

Conclusion

Ureteral stents placed after procedures involving low-HU stones carry a greater risk of becoming encrusted. Among the classification systems, KUB's correlation and predictive utility are paramount.