Search

The aim of this study was to construct the fourth in a series of guidelines on the treatment of urolithiasis by the International Alliance of Urolithiasis (IAU) that by providing a clinical framework for the metabolic evaluation, prevention, and follow-up of patients with urolithiasis based on the best available published literature. All recommendations were summarized following a systematic review and assessment of the literature in the PubMed database from January 1976 to June 2022. Each generated recommendation was graded using a modified GRADE methodology. Guideline recommendations were developed that addressed the following topics: initial evaluation, metabolic testing, dietary measures, medical management, and follow-up of recurrent stone formers. It was emphasized by the Panel that prevention of new stone formation is as important as the surgical removal of the stones. Although general preventive measures may be effective in reducing stone recurrence rates in some patients, specific medical and dietary management should be well considered and eventually applied in an individualized manner based on the outcomes of metabolic work-up, stone analysis and some certain patient related factors. A detailed follow-up of each case is essential depending on the metabolic activity of each individual patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has had a significant impact on the care of patients with urolithiasis. Recommendations and prioritization of endourologic surgical procedures vary among regions, and a comprehensive overall international directive is needed. We used the Delphi method to obtain international consensus on managing urolithiasis patients during the pandemic. Methods: A three-round Delphi process was used to elicit expert consensus (53 global key opinion leaders within the Endourological Society from 36 countries) on an extensive survey on management of endourologic patients in a pandemic. Questions addressed general management, inpatient and outpatient procedures, clinic visits, follow-up care, and best practices for suspension and resumption of routine care. Results: Consensus was achieved in 64/84 (76%) questions. Key consensus findings included the following: consultations should be delivered remotely when possible. Invasive surgical procedures for urolithiasis patients should be reserved for high-risk situations (infection, renal failure, etc.). To prevent aerosolization, spinal anesthesia is preferred over general, whenever feasible. Treatment of asymptomatic renal stones should be deferred. Primary definitive treatment of obstructing or symptomatic stones (both renal and ureteral) is preferred over temporizing drainage. Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy should be continued for obstructive ureteral stones. There was consensus on treatment modalities and drainage strategies depending on location and size of the stone. Conclusion: International endourologist members of the Endourological Society participated in this Delphi initiative to provide expert consensus on management of urolithiasis during a pandemic. These results can be applied currently and during a future pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The incidence of spina bifida (SB) is~1:1000, and risk of stone disease is substantially raised in SB. This is the unique published study of the outcome of patients with SB undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) compared to a neurologically intact historically matched control group at the same institution. Patients and Method: A series of 96 PCNLs in 13 SB and 50 non-SB patients was analyzed. The following measurements were recorded: (1) Comorbidities; (2) Preoperative: (renal function, American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] score); (3) Intraoperative: (anesthesia time, number of tracks, stone-free rate); and (4) Postoperative: (sepsis, intensive therapy unit and total length of stay, transfusion rate, stone composition, rate of stone disease-related nephrectomy). Results: Retrograde access to the ureter was impossible in all cases of SB. The median ASA grade (OR 10.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.6-42.7) and operative time (median difference 30 minutes, 95% CI 20-40) were both higher in the SB cohort. Surgeon's estimate of stone-free rate was significantly lower in the SB cohort (46% vs 82%). Intensive care requirement (0.29 days/PCNL vs 0.1 days/PCNL); total hospital stay (7 days vs 4 days); postoperative transfusion rate (11.8% vs 1.6%); and sepsis rate (38% vs 1.6%) were all significantly higher in the SB group. Repeat PCNL and nephrectomy for recurrent stone disease were both significantly increased in SB cohort compared to control group. Conclusions: PCNL in patients with SB is associated with multiple parameters of poor outcome. Patients with SB should be counseled about increased peri-operative risk and likelihood of stone recurrence. In an era where hospitals are judged according to comparative outcomes, a case may be made for comparing PCNL in this cohort of patients separately because of the significantly increased peri- and postoperative morbidity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clinicians are faced with multiple diagnostic and treatment challenges when managing pregnant women with urolithiasis. Anatomical and physiological changes during pregnancy have to be taken into account whilst simultaneously considering both the expectant mother and the foetus. Ultrasonography remains the first-choice imaging modality, notwithstanding its potentially poor diagnostic accuracy. There is currently no consensus on second-line investigation for suspected urolithiasis. Low-dose non-contrast CT is highly sensitive, but the long-term effects of ionizing radiation on the foetus remain unknown. As far as treatment is concerned, expectant therapy is the primary option for management in the majority of cases. Percutaneous nephrostomy or ureteric stent placements are safe temporizing measures in relieving an acutely obstructed system and should be expedited in the presence of sepsis. Studies have shown ureteroscopy to be safe and effective during pregnancy with no significant risk to the foetus. It is important for the clinician to explain clearly the risks associated with the investigation and management options to the pregnant patient, including an acknowledgement that some of these remain unquantified, or even unknown. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on risk of postoperative sepsis in patients who had stent in situ before treatment of stones. Topics discussed include increase in rates of stone-free along with decrease in intraoperative complications; complications in ureteric stones; and patients who developed sepsis consists prior JJ stent in situ.

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Accuracy of ultrasonography for renal stone detection and size determination: is it good enough for management decisions?" by V. Ganesan et al., published in this issue of the journal.