1279 Long Term Drainage of Malignant Extrinsic Ureteral Obstruction Secondary to Inoperable Pelvic or Abdominal Malignancies Using the Memokath 051 Ureteral Stent

Memokath for treating ureteric stricture post cryoablation of renal mass: A case report of rare complication and proposed alternative management

“…The indication of Memokath includes malignant and benign ureteric strictures in which reconstructive surgeries are not feasible due to failure risks or patient preference [11] . The clinical success rate of Memokath is comparable to the use of a double J stent, with a 100% success rate [13] . On the other hand, Memokath is more cost-effective than regularly changed double J stent [14] .…”

The Memokath-051 Stent for the Treatment of Ureteric Obstruction: A NICE Medical Technology Guidance

“…For metallic stents, the time they can remain in situ varies from 12 months for Resonance [ 13 ] to 18 months for UVENTA [ 14 ] and 3 years for Allium [ 15 ]. Some studies report Memokath-051 indwelling times of up to 4 years [ 16 , 17 ].…”

“…However, an updated version of the same study was identified by the EAC [ 24 ] and included in its review. The EAC identified six comparative studies (of which two were reported as full-text publications [ 7 , 25 ], three were conference abstracts [ 26 – 28 ] and one was presented in a clinical trial record and an abstract [ 17 , 19 ]) and ten single-arm, observational studies (each published as full text) [ 16 , 20 , 21 , 24 , 29 – 34 ].

Fig.

…”

“…Mean age 52.5 ± 15.6 (29–76) Indications for stent placement: NR—all malignant Details of stent placement: NR Setting: NR, but authors based in Korea Partially Memokath-051: mean follow-up: 16 (range 4–98) months. Resonance: mean follow-up: 15.7 ± 2.1 (13–20) Clinical success, theatre time and QoL Partially Study partially matches the scope and provides comparative data for a small number of outcomes NCT00166361 2014 [ 19 ] (clinical trial record, abstract only) Non-randomised, open-label, clinical study investigating Memokath-051 vs double-J Partially Patients: Memokath-051: 14 patients (female 11, male 3); 5 ≥ 65 years Double-J: 10 patients (retrograde placed) (female 7, male 3); 10 ≥ 65 years Indication for stent placement: malignancy or secondary to changes caused by surgery, chemotherapy, or radiation Details of stent placement: double-J stents were inserted retrograde Setting: USA Partially Monitoring continued for as long as the stent was in place Length of time stent remains in situ and complications Clinical success reported in Granberg 2010 [ 17 ] Partially Low number of subjects in each cohort Clinical trial record only. Study partially matches the scope and provides non-UK comparative data EAC External Assessment Centre, IUR ileal ureteral replacement, NA not applicable, NR not reported, QoL quality of life, SD standard deviation, USSQ Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire a Gender was not consistently reported in the studies.…”

“…Clinical success, however, was not consistently defined across the studies, which meant statistical pooling could not be conducted. In the comparative studies, Memokath-051 had a lower clinical success rate than Allium stents (81 vs 100%) [ 27 ], UVENTA (43 vs 82%, p = 0.31) [ 25 ] and IUR (35 vs 89%) [ 26 ], but was comparable with double-J stents (100% success rate in both arms) [ 17 ] and Resonance stents (82 and 86% for Memokath-051 and Resonance stents, respectively) [ 28 ]. Only one study reported details of statistical significance [ 25 ] and found that the difference observed between UVENTA and Memokath-051 was not statistically significant [ 25 ].…”