Background:Ureteral stents play a major role in maintaining ureteral patency.Various innovations are advocated in the design and subsequent removal of traditional double-J ureteral stents,such as the magnetic-end doub...Background:Ureteral stents play a major role in maintaining ureteral patency.Various innovations are advocated in the design and subsequent removal of traditional double-J ureteral stents,such as the magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent(MEDJUS).This stent facilitates outpatient removal using a magnetic stent removal device.This systematic review was conducted to analyze the published role,efficacy,and outcomes of MEDJUS.Materials and methods:After PROSPERO registration(CRD42021235739),an electronic database search(PubMed,EMBASE,Cochrane Library,Scopus,and Web of Science)was performed on December 31,2020.The search terms were as follows:"magnetic,""ureteric,""stent,""double-J,""urotech,"and"Black-Star."Results:Nine studies with atotalof 685 patients wereincluded in the systematic review.The totalnumber of MEDJUS procedures used was 498(73%)compared to the 187(27%)traditional double-J stent method.Magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent extraction failure was reported in 8 cases(1.61%).Compared with traditional stents,MEDJUS showed a cost benefit in 5/5 studies.Better pain scores(during stent in situ)and(at stent removal)were observed in 2/3 and 3/4 of the studies,respectively.Conclusions:Magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent may serve as a viable alternative to traditional double-J stents,offering cost and pain benefits with similar rates of complications.Magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent also offers relative ease of extraction and a reduced need for inpatient removal.This ambulatory stent removal technique has forged its use in modern urological practice.展开更多
文摘Background:Ureteral stents play a major role in maintaining ureteral patency.Various innovations are advocated in the design and subsequent removal of traditional double-J ureteral stents,such as the magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent(MEDJUS).This stent facilitates outpatient removal using a magnetic stent removal device.This systematic review was conducted to analyze the published role,efficacy,and outcomes of MEDJUS.Materials and methods:After PROSPERO registration(CRD42021235739),an electronic database search(PubMed,EMBASE,Cochrane Library,Scopus,and Web of Science)was performed on December 31,2020.The search terms were as follows:"magnetic,""ureteric,""stent,""double-J,""urotech,"and"Black-Star."Results:Nine studies with atotalof 685 patients wereincluded in the systematic review.The totalnumber of MEDJUS procedures used was 498(73%)compared to the 187(27%)traditional double-J stent method.Magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent extraction failure was reported in 8 cases(1.61%).Compared with traditional stents,MEDJUS showed a cost benefit in 5/5 studies.Better pain scores(during stent in situ)and(at stent removal)were observed in 2/3 and 3/4 of the studies,respectively.Conclusions:Magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent may serve as a viable alternative to traditional double-J stents,offering cost and pain benefits with similar rates of complications.Magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent also offers relative ease of extraction and a reduced need for inpatient removal.This ambulatory stent removal technique has forged its use in modern urological practice.
