| Title |
Evaluation of pain perception associated with use of the magnetic-end ureteric double-J stent for short-term ureteric stenting
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
World Journal of Urology, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00345-017-2146-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
S. Sevcenco, K. Eredics, L. Lusuardi, Hans Christoph Klingler |
| Abstract |
To investigate the morbidity, complication rate, and pain perception during removal of a novel ureteric stent with a magnetic end using a-traumatic retrieval catheter. Between November 2013 and July 2015, 151 consecutive patients who underwent semirigid ureterorenoscopy (URS) for stone removal were prospectively enrolled. Stent removal was performed under local anesthesia using a special magnetic-end stent remover 1 week following URS. At follow-up, we obtained patients' medical history, urine culture result, renal ultrasonogram, and visual analog scale (VAS) score regarding stent irritation (VAS 1) and pain during removal (VAS 2). Pain perception during stent removal was significantly less painful in patients with a magnet stent than in those with a regular stent (p < 0.001). Stent irritation was slightly higher in patients with an indwelling magnet stent than in those with a regular stent (p < 0.001). No significant differences in stent irritations were found in patients who had a magnetic stent for 4 weeks after laparoscopic pyeloplasty (p = 0.20). Patients with a magnetic stent experienced significantly less pain during removal with a median VAS 2 score of 2.5 and a mean VAS 2 score of 2.58 [standard deviation (SD) ± 0.90] than those without a magnetic stent a median VAS 2 of 6 and a mean VAS 2 of 5.88 (SD ± 1.43). The stent length correlated with stent irritation (p = 0.05), and it significantly correlated with pain during removal (p < 0.001). The magnetic-end ureteric double-J stent is a safe option associated with less pain, particularly for male patients requiring short-term ureteric stenting. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 35 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 20% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Researcher | 3 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 10 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 31% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 2 | 6% |
| Psychology | 2 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 17 | 49% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 December 2017.
All research outputs
#18,578,649
of 23,011,300 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Urology
#1,735
of 2,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#327,137
of 439,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Urology
#41
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,011,300 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,115 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 439,212 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.