Mid-Atlantic Section of the American Urological Association
Home | About Us | Contact Us   
  Home
  Members
    Members Only Area
    Member Directory
    Join the MA-AUA
  Annual Meeting
  Board of Directors
  Committees
  Careers
  Newsletters
  Visit the AUA
  Advocacy Efforts
  MAAUA Research
  Scholar Fund
Didusch Museum
About the Mid-Atlantic Section of the American Urological Association (MAAUA)

 
  Members Only
  Username
 
  Password
 
   Forgot Password?

 

MAAUA 68th Annual Meeting Abstracts

Back to Program


Is Routine Imaging Following Ureteroscopy for Urinary Calculi Necessary?
Thomas Clements1, W. Aaron Caraway1, *Yu Kuan Lin1, Carl Reese1, Lewis Harpster1, Jay Raman1, *Margaret S Pearle2, *Yair Lotan2
1Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA;2UTSW, Dallas, TX

Introduction: Routine imaging to assess for obstruction or delayed excretion following URS procedures is debatable. We attempt to identify the variables associated with post-procedural abnormal imaging.
Materials & Methods: 478 patients underwent URS for renal/ureteral calculi from 2007 to 2009 at two medical centers. 332 of these patients were imaged with a CT scan (186), IVP (84), renal ultrasound (58), or diuretic renogram (4) within 4 months of URS. Abnormal imaging was defined as ipsilateral hydronephrosis (any grade) or evidence of delayed renal excretion.
Results: 59% of patients had previous stone surgery. Mean diameter of the target stone was 7.2mm with location being 28% kidney, 51% ureter, and 21% both. 56 of 332 (17%) patients had abnormal post-URS imaging with 50% being asymptomatic. Causes included stricture disease in 10 patients, obstructing residual stone fragments in 16, and delayed excretion without obvious stricture in 30. On univariate analysis, a prior ureteroscopic procedure (p=0.03) and inability to retrieve the target stone (p=0.007) were associated with abnormal imaging. However, age, gender, BMI, stone location, stone size, preoperative hydronephrosis, operative time, need for dilation/sheaths, duration of postoperative stenting, and stone composition were not. On multivariate analysis, a prior URS (OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.2-7.1, p=0.015) and inability to retrieve the stone (OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.3-9.1, p=0.013) independently predicted abnormal imaging.
Conclusions: 17% of patients undergoing URS had evidence of abnormal postoperative imaging. Prior URS or inability to retrieve the stone yielded an over three-fold increased incidence of abnormal imaging.


Back to Program

 

 

Copyright © 2012 Mid-Atlantic Section of the American Urological Association. All Rights Reserved.
Read Privacy Policy.