Memokath Stent Failure in Recurrent Bulbar Urethral Strictures: Results From an Investigative Pilot Stage 2A Study

Barbagli, Guido; Rimondi, C; Balò, Sofia; Butnaru, Denis; Sansalone, Salvatore; Lazzeri, Massimo

doi:10.1016/j.urology.2017.04.039

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to aforementioned study of Barbaglia, minor calcifications inside the stent could be treated endoscopically by laser lithotripsy, avoiding the need to remove the stent and preventing severe stone obliteration. 6 In the same study the stent extraction reported was difficult in 2 of 16 patients because of severe internal encrustation and internal growth of inflammatory tissue. 6 The new thulium superpulse fiber laser has been shown to be a very effective in a safe removal of the encrusted urethral stent.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…6 In the same study the stent extraction reported was difficult in 2 of 16 patients because of severe internal encrustation and internal growth of inflammatory tissue. 6 The new thulium superpulse fiber laser has been shown to be a very effective in a safe removal of the encrusted urethral stent. However, in case when the decision is taken not to remove but treat the moderately encrusted stent by lithotripsy, the use of LithoClastÔ (simultaneous ultrasonic and pneumatic lithotripter) could be proposed in order not to damage the structure of the stent wire.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Barbagli et al presented their investigative pilot stage 2a study, resulted with not so encouraging issues. 6 The authors found Memokath stent implantation as a part of recurrent bulbar strictures treatment to be not clinically helpful. The main adverse effects related to Memokath stenting are pain or discomfort, stent dislocation, stone encrustation, and recurrent strictures with the stent in place and after the stent removal.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The main adverse effects related to Memokath stenting are pain or discomfort, stent dislocation, stone encrustation, and recurrent strictures with the stent in place and after the stent removal. 6 The study included 16 patients with maximum term for stent implantation of 1 year.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Thermoexpandable Urethral Nickel–Titanium Stent Memokath for Managing Urethral Bulbar Stricture After Failed Urethroplasty

Martov

Plekhanova

Ergakov

et al. 2020

Journal of Endourology Case Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Urethral stenting became popular two decades ago, but nowadays its frequency is slightly decreased because of the rising application of urethroplasty. Today urethral stenting is reserved only for failure after urethral reconstruction or in cases when the plastic surgery is unfavorable. The Memokath stent (Pnn Medical A/S, Kvistgaard, Denmark) is manufactured from a biocompatible alloy of nickel and titanium and known to be the most popular in this field. Case Description: A 38-year-old man with a history of 9 years Memokath urethral stenting was admitted to our clinic with obstructive lower urinary tract symptoms. The indication for Memokath stenting was repeated recurrences after endoscopic and reconstructive operations. The plain radiography showed a normal position of the stent and only the endoscopic examination revealed its total calcification. New superpulse thulium fiber laser has been used to free the stent from the stones and safely remove it without additional urethral injury. Results: The postoperative time was within normal limits, the catheter was removed on the fourth day after operation. Three months follow-up was without stricture recurrence. We continue active surveillance of the patient. Conclusion: The calcification of the stent could be properly diagnosed endoscopically; the Memokath stent could be safely removed in 9 years after implantation; thulium fiber laser is effective and safe in the management of encrusted urethral stent.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Thermoexpandable Urethral Nickel–Titanium Stent Memokath for Managing Urethral Bulbar Stricture After Failed Urethroplasty

Martov

Plekhanova

Ergakov

et al. 2020

Journal of Endourology Case Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Four studies (4.8%) related to preclinical research (IDEAL phase 0). The 43 remaining original research studies that applied IDEAL were mapped to the corresponding IDEAL stage: IDEAL with nine (20.9%), 27 (62.8%), four (9.3%), 0 (0%), and three (7.0%) publications, respectively .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of the IDEAL framework in the urological literature: where are we in 2018?

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo assess uptake and application of the IDEAL principles in original surgical procedure-or device-related clinical research studies, as well as its reported relevance as characterized by secondary publications, editorials and reviews. ConclusionsThe IDEAL framework has found widespread adoption in the urology literature as witnessed by a large number of original manuscripts and secondary publications citing IDEAL; however, its application is largely limited to the early stages of surgical innovation, frequently with inappropriate and incomplete implementation. Further efforts are needed to guide investigators in the optimal use of the IDEAL framework as it relates to surgical innovation in urology.Abbreviation: IQR, interquartile range.

show abstract