The specific aim of this study is to validate our hypothesis that the magnetic ureteral stents have the same amount of adverse effects as the more commonly used non-magnetic ureteral stents. If this hypothesis would be confirmed then the usage of magnetic ureteral stents would be justified for both reducing patient discomfort by way of fewer cystoscopies and possibly also decreasing the overall expenditures of treatment.
Many urological procedures involving the kidney and the ureters require a stent replacement to avoid un-wanted adverse invents caused by the procedure itself. The stenting, however, predisposes the patient to adverse effects of its own and the application and removal of the stent is a notable monetary expense. The use of magnetic ureteral stents that can be removed via catheter instead of requiring an additional cystoscopy for removal would reduce the discomfort to patients and also possibly decrease the expenditures of the overall treatment. However, the comparability of standard ureteral stents and the magnetic ureteral stents is largely unknown due to there being no published research on the subject as of this time. The specific aim of this study is to validate our hypothesis that the magnetic ureteral stents have the same amount of adverse effects as the more commonly used non-magnetic ureteral stents. The design is as prospective randomized, single-blinded, multi-institutional, non-inferiority study conducted in Hospital Districts of Southwest Finland, Päijät-Häme, Pohjois-Savo, Satakunta and Keski-Suomi. Using age and gender stratification, patients are randomised 1:1 fashion into having a magnetic (n=85) or standard ureter stent (n=85). The primary objectives are the mean differences between the two groups in pain and urinary symptoms scores determined by the Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire (USSQ) 4 weeks after stent placement. The patients will be recruited starting from the 4rd quarter of 2018 and ending during the 3rd quarter of 2020. Preliminary analysis of all results will be available in September 2020 and reports are expected to be written during December 2020.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
Double-J ureteric stent removed using magnet
Double-J ureteric stent removed using cystoscopy
Keski-Suomi Central Hospital
Jyväskylä, Finland
RECRUITINGSatakunta Central Hospital
Pori, Finland
RECRUITINGTurku University Hospital
Turku, Finland
RECRUITINGChange in Pain score in Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire (USSQ)
4 weeks after stent placement. \[5\] Less than 5 points of difference between the two study groups is considered as clinically insignificant.
Time frame: 4 weeks after stent placement and 4 weeks after stent removal
General health score in Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire (USSQ)
4 weeks after stent placement. Scores less than 4 points of difference between the two study groups is considered as clinically insignificant.
Time frame: 4 weeks after stent placement and 4 weeks after stent removal
Sexual score in Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire (USSQ)
4 weeks after stent placement. Scores less than 4 points of difference between the two study groups is considered as clinically insignificant.
Time frame: 4 weeks after stent placement and 4 weeks after stent removal
Working performance score in Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire (USSQ)
4 weeks after stent placement. Scores less than 4 points of difference between the two study groups is considered as clinically insignificant.
Time frame: 4 weeks after stent placement and 4 weeks after stent removal
Urinary symptom score in Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire (USSQ)
4 weeks after stent placement. Scores less than 4 points of difference between the two study groups is considered as clinically insignificant.
Time frame: 4 weeks after stent placement and 4 weeks after stent removal
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
NONE
Enrollment
170