Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 6, 2026

Vessel-sparing Excision and Primary Anastomosis
Published on: January 7, 2019
Cost analysis of removing pediatric ureteral stents with and without a retrieval string
Hoang-Kim Le1, Ryan Gleber2, Ruth A Bush3
1Division of Pediatric Urology, University of California San Diego, Rady Children's Hospital San Diego, 3020 Children's Way MC - 5120, San Diego, CA, 92123, USA; Section of Pediatric Urology, Baylor Scott & White Health, 2401 S 31st Street, Temple, TX, 76504, USA.
Insights
Removing ureteral stents with retrieval strings (SWS) is significantly more cost-effective than those without retrieval strings (SWOS) in pediatric urology. This approach maintains safety and reduces healthcare costs, making SWS a preferred option in many cases.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Urology
- Health Economics
- Medical Device Technology
Background:
- Indwelling ureteral stents are crucial for urinary drainage in urologic surgeries.
- Stent removal without a retrieval string (SWOS) in pediatric patients necessitates secondary operations and anesthesia.
- Stents with retrieval strings (SWS) offer a less burdensome alternative, but adoption is hindered by perceived complication risks.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the costs associated with removing SWS versus SWOS in pediatric patients.
- To evaluate if SWS removal increases complication rates compared to SWOS removal.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective chart review of pediatric patients undergoing urologic surgery with stent placement.
- Analysis of charges and healthcare costs related to stent removal, including estimated lost wages and post-stent events.
- Evaluation of complication rates and healthcare utilization for both SWS and SWOS groups.
Main Results:
- SWS removal cost $400.48, significantly less than the $2290.86 for SWOS removal (P < 0.01).
- Mean stent duration was shorter for SWS (10.1 days) compared to SWOS (34.0 days) (P < 0.01).
- No significant differences in complications, early dislodgment, or costly healthcare utilization were observed between SWS and SWOS groups, even in ureteral reconstruction.
Conclusions:
- Removal of SWS is more cost-effective than SWOS in pediatric urology, with comparable safety outcomes.
- SWS should be considered for uncomplicated ureteroscopy to reduce healthcare costs.
- Further research with larger, matched cohorts is needed to confirm benefits in complex cases like ureteral reconstruction.
Background:
Indwelling ureteral stents are commonly placed in urologic surgeries where optimal urinary drainage is necessary. In the pediatric population, removing a stent without retrieval string (SWOS) requires a secondary operation and additional anesthetic exposure. Although these burdens can be mitigated through the placement of a stent with retrieval string (SWS), fears of complications may prevent widespread adoption of this practice by pediatric urologists.
Objective:
The authors sought to assess the differential cost of removing SWS and SWOS. It was hypothesized that costs associated with removing SWS are significantly lower than those associated with removing SWOS, without increasing complications.
Study Design:
A retrospective chart review was performed on pediatric patients undergoing common urologic surgeries with concurrent stent placement at a single tertiary referral center. Charges and healthcare costs surrounding the removal of ureteral stents were evaluated using the institution-specific ratio of cost to charges, by estimating lost wages, and by exploring differences in poststent healthcare-related events that incur additional cost.
Results:
A total of 109 patients with a median age of 5 years (range: 6 months-20 years) were reviewed. A total of 29 patients had SWS, and 80 had SWOS. The theoretical cost of SWS removal in clinic was $400.48 compared with $2290.86 ± $119.30 for operative removal of SWOS, with mean difference of $1890.38 (P < 0.01). The mean stent duration of SWOS was 34.0 ± 13.2 days vs. 10.1 ± 4.9 days for SWS (P < 0.01). Subgroup analysis of the ureteral reconstruction group showed no difference in any complications (35% vs 27%, respectively), early dislodgment (7% vs 7%, respectively) or costly healthcare utilization (23% vs 20%, respectively) among patients with SWOS compared with those with SWS. In SWS group with early dislodgment, neither required a secondary procedure.
Discussion:
With rising healthcare expenditures, physicians must be able to provide cost-effective treatment while not compromising safety or outcomes. Unlike prior analyses of cost related to the type of the stent used, the present study specifically reviewed costs of removing SWS versus SWOS and evaluated rates of costly complications. The study findings provide a preliminary basis for advocating the more economical use of SWS when indicated. Lack of power and heterogeneity of the groups need to be addressed in future analyses with larger, matched cohorts.
Conclusion:
Removal of SWS is more cost-effective than that of SWOS while maintaining similar safety outcomes and should be considered in certain pediatric urology cases to decrease healthcare cost. SWS should be preferred for uncomplicated ureteroscopy, but benefits are less certain in ureteral reconstruction; further studies are needed.
More Related Videos
06:39Technical Modification of the Terminal Ureter During Total Transperitoneal Laparoscopic Nephroureterectomy for Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma
Published on: November 22, 2019
05:34A Mouse Model to Evaluate the Long-Term Structural and Functional Outcomes after the Reversal of Prolonged Unilateral Ureteric Obstruction
Published on: July 18, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Urinary Tract Calculi VI: Surgical Management
Kidney Transplant II: Surgical Procedure
Urologic Endoscopic Procedure: Cystoscopic Examination
Imaging Studies V: Intravenous Urography and Retrograde Pyelography
Urinary Tract Calculi V: Nursing Management
Urinary Tract Calculi III: Medical Management