Ureteroscopy for transplant lithiasis

Elias Hyams, Tracy Marien, Aron Bruhn, Adrienne Quirouet, Sero Andonian, Ojas Shah, Brian Matlaga

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background and Purpose: The optimal management of renal and ureteral calculi in transplanted kidneys is not well defined. Although larger (>1.5 cm) stone burdens are generally treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), smaller stones may be reasonably approached with retrograde or antegrade ureteroscopy (URS). We report our multicenter experience with URS for transplant lithiasis. Patients and Methods: URS performed for stone disease within a transplanted kidney were retrospectively identified at three stone-referral centers between 2006 and 2011. Demographic and disease parameters were recorded, as were perioperative and postoperative details. Results: Twelve patients underwent URS for a calculus in a transplant renal unit and/or ureter. For retrograde procedures (7), access to the ureteral orifice was facilitated by the use of a Kumpe catheter; a two-wire (safety and working guidewire) technique was used. For antegrade procedures (5), the ureteroscope was passed into the kidney using a two-wire technique without tract dilation. All stones but one necessitated holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser lithotripsy with extraction of stone fragments. All patients were stone free on postoperative imaging except for one patient with a 2-mm fragment that was observed. Stone analysis included calcium oxalate (6), calcium phosphate (4), and struvite (1). Conclusion: Antegrade and retrograde URS are safe and effective treatments for patients with simple stone burdens in a transplanted kidney. Although retrograde access to the ureter can be challenging, specialized techniques and modern endoscope technology facilitate this process. Antegrade URS for small stone burdens can be performed safely and effectively without tract dilation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)819-822
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Endourology
Volume26
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2012

Fingerprint

Ureteroscopy
Lithiasis
Transplants
Kidney
Ureter
Dilatation
Holmium
Laser Lithotripsy
Ureteroscopes
Ureteral Calculi
Percutaneous Nephrostomy
Calcium Oxalate
Kidney Calculi
Endoscopes
Solid-State Lasers
Calculi
Referral and Consultation
Catheters
Demography
Technology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Hyams, E., Marien, T., Bruhn, A., Quirouet, A., Andonian, S., Shah, O., & Matlaga, B. (2012). Ureteroscopy for transplant lithiasis. Journal of Endourology, 26(7), 819-822. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2011.0495

Ureteroscopy for transplant lithiasis. / Hyams, Elias; Marien, Tracy; Bruhn, Aron; Quirouet, Adrienne; Andonian, Sero; Shah, Ojas; Matlaga, Brian.

In: Journal of Endourology, Vol. 26, No. 7, 01.07.2012, p. 819-822.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hyams, E, Marien, T, Bruhn, A, Quirouet, A, Andonian, S, Shah, O & Matlaga, B 2012, 'Ureteroscopy for transplant lithiasis', Journal of Endourology, vol. 26, no. 7, pp. 819-822. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2011.0495
Hyams E, Marien T, Bruhn A, Quirouet A, Andonian S, Shah O et al. Ureteroscopy for transplant lithiasis. Journal of Endourology. 2012 Jul 1;26(7):819-822. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2011.0495
Hyams, Elias ; Marien, Tracy ; Bruhn, Aron ; Quirouet, Adrienne ; Andonian, Sero ; Shah, Ojas ; Matlaga, Brian. / Ureteroscopy for transplant lithiasis. In: Journal of Endourology. 2012 ; Vol. 26, No. 7. pp. 819-822.
@article{08cabd934f1a418eacf7ccf1b7c9a1f3,
title = "Ureteroscopy for transplant lithiasis",
abstract = "Background and Purpose: The optimal management of renal and ureteral calculi in transplanted kidneys is not well defined. Although larger (>1.5 cm) stone burdens are generally treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), smaller stones may be reasonably approached with retrograde or antegrade ureteroscopy (URS). We report our multicenter experience with URS for transplant lithiasis. Patients and Methods: URS performed for stone disease within a transplanted kidney were retrospectively identified at three stone-referral centers between 2006 and 2011. Demographic and disease parameters were recorded, as were perioperative and postoperative details. Results: Twelve patients underwent URS for a calculus in a transplant renal unit and/or ureter. For retrograde procedures (7), access to the ureteral orifice was facilitated by the use of a Kumpe catheter; a two-wire (safety and working guidewire) technique was used. For antegrade procedures (5), the ureteroscope was passed into the kidney using a two-wire technique without tract dilation. All stones but one necessitated holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser lithotripsy with extraction of stone fragments. All patients were stone free on postoperative imaging except for one patient with a 2-mm fragment that was observed. Stone analysis included calcium oxalate (6), calcium phosphate (4), and struvite (1). Conclusion: Antegrade and retrograde URS are safe and effective treatments for patients with simple stone burdens in a transplanted kidney. Although retrograde access to the ureter can be challenging, specialized techniques and modern endoscope technology facilitate this process. Antegrade URS for small stone burdens can be performed safely and effectively without tract dilation.",
author = "Elias Hyams and Tracy Marien and Aron Bruhn and Adrienne Quirouet and Sero Andonian and Ojas Shah and Brian Matlaga",
year = "2012",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1089/end.2011.0495",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "26",
pages = "819--822",
journal = "Journal of Endourology",
issn = "0892-7790",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc.",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ureteroscopy for transplant lithiasis

AU - Hyams, Elias

AU - Marien, Tracy

AU - Bruhn, Aron

AU - Quirouet, Adrienne

AU - Andonian, Sero

AU - Shah, Ojas

AU - Matlaga, Brian

PY - 2012/7/1

Y1 - 2012/7/1

N2 - Background and Purpose: The optimal management of renal and ureteral calculi in transplanted kidneys is not well defined. Although larger (>1.5 cm) stone burdens are generally treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), smaller stones may be reasonably approached with retrograde or antegrade ureteroscopy (URS). We report our multicenter experience with URS for transplant lithiasis. Patients and Methods: URS performed for stone disease within a transplanted kidney were retrospectively identified at three stone-referral centers between 2006 and 2011. Demographic and disease parameters were recorded, as were perioperative and postoperative details. Results: Twelve patients underwent URS for a calculus in a transplant renal unit and/or ureter. For retrograde procedures (7), access to the ureteral orifice was facilitated by the use of a Kumpe catheter; a two-wire (safety and working guidewire) technique was used. For antegrade procedures (5), the ureteroscope was passed into the kidney using a two-wire technique without tract dilation. All stones but one necessitated holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser lithotripsy with extraction of stone fragments. All patients were stone free on postoperative imaging except for one patient with a 2-mm fragment that was observed. Stone analysis included calcium oxalate (6), calcium phosphate (4), and struvite (1). Conclusion: Antegrade and retrograde URS are safe and effective treatments for patients with simple stone burdens in a transplanted kidney. Although retrograde access to the ureter can be challenging, specialized techniques and modern endoscope technology facilitate this process. Antegrade URS for small stone burdens can be performed safely and effectively without tract dilation.

AB - Background and Purpose: The optimal management of renal and ureteral calculi in transplanted kidneys is not well defined. Although larger (>1.5 cm) stone burdens are generally treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), smaller stones may be reasonably approached with retrograde or antegrade ureteroscopy (URS). We report our multicenter experience with URS for transplant lithiasis. Patients and Methods: URS performed for stone disease within a transplanted kidney were retrospectively identified at three stone-referral centers between 2006 and 2011. Demographic and disease parameters were recorded, as were perioperative and postoperative details. Results: Twelve patients underwent URS for a calculus in a transplant renal unit and/or ureter. For retrograde procedures (7), access to the ureteral orifice was facilitated by the use of a Kumpe catheter; a two-wire (safety and working guidewire) technique was used. For antegrade procedures (5), the ureteroscope was passed into the kidney using a two-wire technique without tract dilation. All stones but one necessitated holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser lithotripsy with extraction of stone fragments. All patients were stone free on postoperative imaging except for one patient with a 2-mm fragment that was observed. Stone analysis included calcium oxalate (6), calcium phosphate (4), and struvite (1). Conclusion: Antegrade and retrograde URS are safe and effective treatments for patients with simple stone burdens in a transplanted kidney. Although retrograde access to the ureter can be challenging, specialized techniques and modern endoscope technology facilitate this process. Antegrade URS for small stone burdens can be performed safely and effectively without tract dilation.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84863851623&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84863851623&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/end.2011.0495

DO - 10.1089/end.2011.0495

M3 - Article

C2 - 22201418

AN - SCOPUS:84863851623

VL - 26

SP - 819

EP - 822

JO - Journal of Endourology

JF - Journal of Endourology

SN - 0892-7790

IS - 7

ER -