title: Stenting after ureteroscopy: pros and cons.
abstract: The results of the numerous trials evaluating stenting after uncomplicated ureteroscopy suggest that the routine placement of a stent is no longer necessary. Patients with stents seem to have significantly more pain and irritative voiding symptoms. In addition, the routine placement of a stent significantly adds to the overall cost of the procedure. There is a subgroup of patients who would likely benefit from a stent as evidenced by the higher readmission to hospital rate than in nonstented patients. Ideally, future trials will help unmask a method to identify these patients.
authors.affiliation: Division of Urology, University of Western Ontario, 268 Grosvenor Street, London, Ontario N6A4V2, Canada.
authors.forename: Bodo E
authors.initials: BE
authors.lastname: Knudsen
authors.forename: Darren T
authors.initials: DT
authors.lastname: Beiko
authors.forename: John D
authors.initials: JD
authors.lastname: Denstedt
mesh_terms: D004868:Equipment Failure; D004869:Equipment Safety; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D019060:Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods; D010147:Pain Measurement; D011183:Postoperative Complications; D018570:Risk Assessment; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D012720:Severity of Illness Index; D015607:Stents / Q000009:adverse effects*; D014514:Ureteral Calculi / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000601:surgery*; D020709:Ureteroscopes; D018666:Ureteroscopy / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*