Comparison of stone clearance rate in patients with distal ureteric stones, undergoing URS with and without a safety guide wire.

Objective: To compare stone clearance rate in patients with distal ureteric stones, undergoing URS with safety guide wire and without safety guide wire. Study Design: Randomized Clinical Trial study. Setting: Department of Urology, Pir Abdul Qadir Shah Institute of Medical sciences. Period: January, 2020 to December 2020. Material & Methods: The study patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria were divided into two groups using the lottery method. Group A: Patients underwent URS with insertion of safety guidewire (SGW). Group B: These patients underwent URS without safety guidewire (SGW). Patients in both groups were compared for stone clearance. Results: Mean age in Group A was 37.79±12.44 years and in Group B were 33.31±11.48 years. Group wise distribution of gender showed 79 (73.83%) male and 28 (26.17%) females in Group A and 70(65.42%) male and 37 female (34.57%) in Group B. In comparison of both groups, 65.42% stone clearance was noted in Group A while 78.50% stone clearance was found in Group B and p-value found to be significant (P=0.033). Conclusion: Our study concluded that stone clearance in patients with distal ureteral stones undergoing URS without SGW is higher in comparison to URS with SGW, without any added advantage.

Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for large lower ureteral stone: a case series report

Background Identifying the precise location of the lower ureter is crucial in not only ureteral surgeries but also the other surgeries that may cause ureteral injury. Although a variety of approaches have been applied to detect the location of the lower ureter, the majority of them had an association with several complications or be difficult to perform perfectly or be time-consuming. Case presentation Seven patients with distal ureteric stones of the size ranged from 2 to 3 cm. All patients entered the study after signing the informed consent, and the case report is based on CARE guidelines. After specifying the inner ring of the inguinal canal, the posterior peritoneum was opened and dissected from an area of 2 cm medial and 2 cm inferior to the inner ring. Thereafter, the stone was extracted from the precise location of them, which was identified by ureteral pinching. Conclusion We assumed that we were easily able to identify the site of the lower ureter through 2 cm medial and 2 cm inferior to the inner ring. The result of our study on seven patients demonstrated that this maneuver can minimize the time of surgery and no complications have been seen while this approach was applied.