Related Experiment Videos
'Firm' versus 'soft' double pigtail ureteric stents: a randomised blind comparative trial
G M Lennon1, J A Thornhill, P A Sweeney
1Department of Urology, Meath Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
European Urology
|January 1, 1995
Summary
Soft ureteric stents offer better patient comfort than firm ones. This study found that while insertion and stability were similar, firm stents caused more pain and discomfort, impacting daily activities.
Area of Science:
- Urology
- Biomaterials Science
Background:
- Ureteric stents are crucial for urinary tract drainage.
- Patient comfort is a significant concern with ureteric stent use.
- Current perceptions suggest firm stents cause more discomfort than soft stents, but objective data is limited.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare firm (polyurethane) and soft (Sof-Flex) ureteric stents.
- To evaluate differences in insertion ease, stability, biocompatibility, and patient tolerance.
- To provide objective data on stent material impact on patient outcomes.
Main Methods:
- Randomized controlled trial involving 155 patients.
- Patients received either firm or soft double pigtail ureteric catheters.
- Data collected on insertion, stability, bladder inflammation, encrustation, and patient-reported symptoms (double-blind).
Main Results:
- No significant differences in ease of insertion, positional stability, bladder inflammation, or stent encrustation.
- Firm stents showed a significantly higher incidence of dysuria, renal, and suprapubic pain.
- Patients with soft stents reported higher rates of normal activity and return to work.
Conclusions:
- Stent material softness is a key factor in patient tolerance.
- Soft ureteric stents may improve patient comfort and functional recovery post-procedure.
- Clinical practice should consider stent material for optimizing patient experience.