Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the effect of preoperative stenting (POS) on the perioperative outcomes of flexible ureterorenoscopy (fURS). Materials and Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted based on the PRISMA statement. From the initially retrieved 609 reports, we excluded the ineligible studies at 2 stages. We only included studies that contained fURS patients with and without POS in the same report. Data of patients who underwent semirigid ureteroscope only were excluded from the analysis. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) system was applied for risk of bias assessment. Results: A total of 20 studies including 5,852 patients were involved. 48.5% of the patients had preoperative stent. Stone-free rate was significantly higher with prestenting; odds ratio (OR) was 1.98 (95% CI: 1.51–2.58) (Z = 5.02; p = 0.00001). It also displayed tendency toward lower complications; OR was 0.74 (95% CI: 0.52–1.05) (Z = 1.67; p = 0.09). POS significantly increased the use of ureteral access sheath; OR was 1.49 (95% CI: 1.05–2.13) (Z = 2.22; p = 0.03). Risk of bias assessment showed 13 and 7 studies with low and moderate risk, respectively. Conclusions: POS clearly improves the stone-free rates after fURS. It might reduce the complications, especially ureteral injury. These findings might help solve the current debate and can be useful for urologists during patient counselling for a proper decision-making.

1.
Pietropaolo
A
,
Proietti
S
,
Geraghty
R
,
Skolarikos
A
,
Papatsoris
A
,
Liatsikos
E
,
Trends of “urolithiasis: interventions, simulation, and laser technology” over the last 16 years (2000–2015) as published in the literature (PubMed): a systematic review from European section of Uro-technology (ESUT)
.
World J Urol
.
2017
;
35
:
1651
8
.
2.
Türk
C
,
Petřík
A
,
Sarica
K
,
Seitz
C
,
Skolarikos
A
,
Straub
M
,
EAU guidelines on diagnosis and conservative management of urolithiasis
.
Eur Urol
.
2016
;
69
(
3
):
468
74
. .
3.
Dauw
CA
,
Simeon
L
,
Alruwaily
AF
,
Sanguedolce
F
,
Hollingsworth
JM
,
Roberts
WW
,
Contemporary practice patterns of flexible ureteroscopy for treating renal stones: results of a worldwide survey
.
J Endourol
.
2015
;
29
(
11
):
1221
30
. .
4.
Geraghty
R
,
Abourmarzouk
O
,
Rai
B
,
Biyani
CS
,
Rukin
NJ
,
Somani
BK
.
Evidence for Ureterorenoscopy and laser fragmentation (URSL) for large renal stones in the modern era
.
Curr Urol Rep
.
2015
;
16
(
8
):
54
. .
5.
Joshi
HB
,
Stainthorpe
A
,
MacDonagh
RP
,
Keeley
FX
 Jr
,
Timoney
AG
,
Barry
MJ
.
Indwelling ureteral stents: evaluation of symptoms, quality of life and utility
.
J Urol
.
2003
;
169
(
3
):
1065
9
. .
6.
Yuk
HD
,
Park
J
,
Cho
SY
,
Sung
LH
,
Jeong
CW
.
The effect of preoperative ureteral stenting in retrograde Intrarenal surgery: a multicenter, propensity score-matched study
.
BMC Urol
.
2020
;
20
(
1
):
147
. .
7.
Werthemann
P
,
Weikert
S
,
Enzmann
T
,
Schostak
M
,
Lebentrau
S
.
A stent for every stone? Prestenting habits and outcomes from a german multicenter prospective study on the Benchmarks of Ureteroroscopic Stone Treatment (BUSTER)
.
Urol Int
.
2020
;
104
(
5–6
):
431
6
. .
8.
Demir
DO
,
Doluoglu
OG
,
Yildiz
Y
,
Bozkurt
S
,
Ayyildiz
A
,
Demirbas
A
.
Risk factors for infectious complications in patients undergoing retrograde intrarenal surgery
.
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak
.
2019
;
29
(
6
):
558
62
. .
9.
Chen
H
,
Chen
G
,
Zhu
Y
,
Yang
Z
,
Xiong
C
,
Pan
Y
.
Analysis of prestenting on outcomes of flexible ureteroscopy for upper urinary urolithiasis: a historical control study
.
Urol Int
.
2019
;
102
(
2
):
175
80
. .
10.
Zhang
J
,
Xu
C
,
He
D
,
Lu
Y
,
Hu
H
,
Qin
B
,
Flexible ureteroscopy for renal stone without preoperative ureteral stenting shows good prognosis
.
PeerJ
.
2016
;
4
:
e2728
. .
11.
Moher
D
,
Shamseer
L
,
Clarke
M
,
Ghersi
D
,
Liberati
A
,
Petticrew
M
,
Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement
.
Syst Rev
.
2015
;
4
(
1
):
1
. .
12.
Wells
GA
,
Shea
B
,
O’Connell
D
,
Peterson
J
.
The Newcastle-OttawaScale (NOS) for assessing the quality of non randomized studies in meta-analyses
;
2011
. Available at: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemi ology/oxford.asp.
13.
Lee
MH
,
Lee
IJ
,
Kim
TJ
,
Lee
SC
,
Jeong
CW
,
Hong
SK
,
The effect of short-term preoperative ureteral stenting on the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stones
.
World J Urol
.
2019
;
37
(
7
):
1435
40
. .
14.
Goldberg
H
,
Golomb
D
,
Shtabholtz
Y
,
Tapiero
S
,
Creiderman
G
,
Shariv
A
,
The “old” 15 mm renal stone size limit for RIRS remains a clinically significant threshold size
.
World J Urol
.
2017
;
35
(
12
):
1947
54
. .
15.
Yuruk
E
,
Tuken
M
,
Gonultas
S
,
Colakerol
A
,
Cakir
OO
,
Binbay
M
,
Retrograde intrarenal surgery in the management of pediatric cystine stones
.
J Pediatr Urol
.
2017
;
13
(
5
):
487
e5
. .e1.
16.
Gokce
MI
,
Telli
O
,
Akinci
A
,
Esen
B
,
Suer
E
,
Ozkidik
M
,
Effect of prestenting on success and complication rates of ureterorenoscopy in pediatric population
.
J Endourol
.
2016
;
30
(
8
):
850
5
. .
17.
Jessen
JP
,
Breda
A
,
Brehmer
M
,
Liatsikos
EN
,
Millan Rodriguez
F
,
Osther
PJ
,
International collaboration in endourology: multicenter evaluation of prestenting for ureterorenoscopy
.
J Endourol
.
2016
;
30
(
3
):
268
73
. .
18.
Sfoungaristos
S
,
Gofrit
ON
,
Mykoniatis
I
,
Landau
EH
,
Katafigiotis
I
,
Pode
D
,
External validation of Resorlu-Unsal stone score as predictor of outcomes after retrograde intrarenal surgery
.
Int Urol Nephrol
.
2016
;
48
(
8
):
1247
52
. .
19.
Dessyn
JF
,
Balssa
L
,
Chabannes
E
,
Jacquemet
B
,
Bernardini
S
,
Bittard
H
,
Flexible ureterorenoscopy for renal and proximal ureteral stone in patients with previous ureteral stenting: impact on stone-free rate and morbidity
.
J Endourol
.
2016
;
30
(
10
):
1084
8
. .
20.
Lai
D
,
Chen
M
,
He
Y
,
Li
X
.
Simultaneous retrograde intrarenal surgery for ipsilateral asymptomatic renal stones in patients with ureteroscopic symptomatic ureteral stone removal
.
BMC Urol
.
2015
;
15
:
22
. .
21.
Assimos
D
,
Crisci
A
,
Culkin
D
,
Xue
W
,
Roelofs
A
,
Duvdevani
M
,
Preoperative JJ stent placement in ureteric and renal stone treatment: results from the Clinical Research Office of Endourological Society (CROES) ureteroscopy (URS) Global Study
.
BJU Int
.
2016
;
117
(
4
):
648
54
. .
22.
Lumma
PP
,
Schneider
P
,
Strauss
A
,
Plothe
KD
,
Thelen
P
,
Ringert
RH
,
Impact of ureteral stenting prior to ureterorenoscopy on stone-free rates and complications
.
World J Urol
.
2013
;
31
(
4
):
855
9
. .
23.
Traxer
O
,
Thomas
A
.
Prospective evaluation and classification of ureteral wall injuries resulting from insertion of a ureteral access sheath during retrograde intrarenal surgery
.
J Urol
.
2013
;
189
(
2
):
580
4
. .
24.
Kawahara
T
,
Ito
H
,
Terao
H
,
Ishigaki
H
,
Ogawa
T
,
Uemura
H
,
Preoperative stenting for ureteroscopic lithotripsy for a large renal stone
.
Int J Urol
.
2012
;
19
(
9
):
881
5
. .
25.
Netsch
C
,
Knipper
S
,
Bach
T
,
Herrmann
TR
,
Gross
AJ
.
Impact of preoperative ureteral stenting on stone-free rates of ureteroscopy for nephroureterolithiasis: a matched-paired analysis of 286 patients
.
Urology
.
2012
;
80
(
6
):
1214
9
. .
26.
Shields
JM
,
Bird
VG
,
Graves
R
,
Gómez-Marín
O
.
Impact of preoperative ureteral stenting on outcome of ureteroscopic treatment for urinary lithiasis
.
J Urol
.
2009
;
182
(
6
):
2768
74
. .
27.
Rubenstein
RA
,
Zhao
LC
,
Loeb
S
,
Shore
DM
,
Nadler
RB
.
Prestenting improves ureteroscopic stone-free rates
.
J Endourol
.
2007
;
21
(
11
):
1277
80
. .
28.
Bagley
DH
,
Huffman
JL
,
Lyon
ES
.
Flexible ureteropyeloscopy: diagnosis and treatment in the upper urinary tract
.
J Urol
.
1987
;
138
(
2
):
280
5
. .
29.
Takagi
T
,
Go
T
,
Takayasu
H
,
Aso
Y
.
Fiberoptic pyeloureteroscope
.
Surgery
.
1971
;
70
(
5
):
661
.
30.
Ng
YH
,
Somani
BK
,
Dennison
A
,
Kata
SG
,
Nabi
G
,
Brown
S
.
Irrigant flow and intrarenal pressure during flexible ureteroscopy: the effect of different access sheaths, working channel instruments, and hydrostatic pressure
.
J Endourol
.
2010
;
24
(
12
):
1915
20
. .
31.
Koo
KC
,
Yoon
JH
,
Park
NC
,
Lee
HS
,
Ahn
HK
,
Lee
KS
,
The impact of preoperative α-adrenergic antagonists on ureteral access sheath insertion force and the upper limit of force required to avoid ureteral mucosal injury: a randomized controlled study
.
J Urol
.
2018
;
199
(
6
):
1622
30
.
32.
Tracy
CR
,
Ghareeb
GM
,
Paul
CJ
,
Brooks
NA
.
Increasing the size of ureteral access sheath during retrograde intrarenal surgery improves surgical efficiency without increasing complications
.
World J Urol
.
2018
;
36
(
6
):
971
8
. .
33.
Mogilevkin
Y
,
Sofer
M
,
Margel
D
,
Greenstein
A
,
Lifshitz
D
.
Predicting an effective ureteral access sheath insertion: a bicenter prospective study
.
J Endourol
.
2014
;
28
(
12
):
1414
7
. .
34.
Huang
J
,
Zhao
Z
,
AlSmadi
JK
,
Liang
X
,
Zhong
F
,
Zeng
T
,
Use of the ureteral access sheath during ureteroscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
.
PLoS One
.
2018
;
13
(
2
):
e0193600
. .
35.
Mitropoulos
D
,
Artibani
W
,
Graefen
M
,
Remzi
M
,
Rouprêt
M
,
Truss
M
.
Reporting and grading of complications after urologic surgical procedures: an ad hoc EAU guidelines panel assessment and recommendations
.
Eur Urol
.
2012
;
61
(
2
):
341
9
. .
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.