4.3 Review

Safety and efficacy of ureteroscopy and stone fragmentation for pediatric renal stones: a systematic review

Journal

TRANSLATIONAL ANDROLOGY AND UROLOGY
Volume 8, Issue -, Pages S442-S447

Publisher

AME PUBL CO
DOI: 10.21037/tau.2019.08.23

Keywords

Flexible ureteroscopy (FURS); laser fragmentation; pediatric stone disease; pediatric ureteroscopy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Flexible ureteroscopy (FURS) is now commonly used for the treatment of paediatric renal stones. We conducted a systematic review of literature looking at the outcomes of flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy (FURSL) for paediatric stone disease. A systematic review was conducted in a Cochrane style and in accordance PRISMA checklist using MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane library for all English language articles in patients <= 18 years from 1990-2018 who underwent FURSL. A total of 11 studies reported on 431 patients, with a mean age of 8.5 years (range, 0.25-17 years). The mean stone size was 13 mm (range, 1.5-30 mm). The overall stone free rate (SFR) was 87% (58-100%) with a mean complication rate of 12.6% (n=55) (range, 0-31.3%) and 76% needing a post-operative ureteric stent insertion. Of the complications, Clavien I/II complications included fever and urinary tract infection (UTI) (n=19), haematuria (n=7), stent discomfort/stent symptoms/post- operative pain (n=8), voiding disturbance (n=2) and post-operative nausea and vomiting (n=1). Clavien III complications included ureteral injury which included perforation ( n=6), urinoma (n=1), and acute urinary retention secondary to stone fragmentation (n=1). Clavien IV complications were urinoma (n=2) and no Clavien V complications were noted. Our review suggests that ureteroscopy and laser stone fragmentation for paediatric population is a safe and effective treatment with good SFR and a low risk of complications.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available