Thermo-expandable intraprostatic nitinol stents in the treatment of bladder outlet obstruction: a consecutive case series
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/sju.v59.41991Keywords:
Lower urinary tract symptoms, MIST, prostate, Prostatic hyperplasia, prostatic stent, urinary retentionAbstract
Objective: In high-risk patients, prostatic stents may alleviate obstruction at the prostate level. Since 2020 we have used thermo-expandable intraprostatic nitinol stents. Here we document outcomes through the first years with the procedure.
Material and methods: We reviewed patients who had undergone stent treatment between May 2020 and October 2023. Patient and procedural data, urinary symptoms, complications and side effects were recorded. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize outcomes and we evaluated predictors of success and complications using robust multiple regression analyses.
Results: We included 52 consecutive patients with a median age of 82 years (range 71–96) and a median Charlson Comorbidity Index of 6 (3–11). Forty-seven men used indwelling catheters, two used clean intermittent catheterization, and three had severe lower urinary tract symptoms. Stents were placed under general anesthesia, sedation, and local anesthesia in 39, 4, and 9 men, respectively. The median treatment time was 14 min (range 8–40). One complication, in the form of an infection requiring IV antibiotics, occurred. Subsequently, 45 men (87%) were able to void spontaneously without bothersome symptoms. After a median of 11 (2–44) months, 8 men had their stents removed due to recurring symptoms. This gives an overall success rate of 37/52 patients (71%). No predictors of success or complications were identified.
Conclusions: Thermo-expandable intraprostatic nitinol stents demonstrate a high success rate with a low risk of complications and may serve as an alternative to permanent or intermittent catheterization for men who are unable or unwilling to undergo flow-improving surgery.
Downloads
References
Irwin DE, Milsom I, Hunskaar S, et al. Population-based survey of urinary incontinence, overactive bladder, and other lower urinary tract symptoms in five countries: results of the EPIC study. Eur Urol. 2006; 50(6): 1306–1315. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EURURO.2006.09.019 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2006.09.019
Gratzke C, Bachmann A, Descazeaud A, et al. EAU guidelines on the assessment of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms including benign prostatic obstruction. Eur Urol. 2015; 67(6): 1099–1109. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EURURO.2014.12.038 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.12.038
Kohler-Ockmore J, Feneley RC. Long-term catheterization of the bladder: prevalence and morbidity. Br J Urol. 1996; 77(3): 347–351. https://doi.org/10.1046/J.1464-410X.1996.09074.X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410X.1996.09074.x
Cornu JN, Dupuis H, Gazdovich S. Hot topics of the past decade: evolutions and revolutions in lower urinary tract symptoms. Eur Urol Focus. 2022; 8(2): 371–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EUF.2022.03.012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2022.03.012
Porto JG, Arbelaez MCS, Blachman-Braun R, et al. Complications associated with minimally invasive surgical therapies (MIST) for surgical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database review. World J Urol. 2023; 41(7): 1975–1982. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00345-023-04440-W DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-023-04440-w
Papatsoris AG, Junaid I, Zachou A, et al. New developments in the use of prostatic stents. Open Access J Urol. 2011; 3(1): 63–68. https://doi.org/10.2147/OAJU.S11752 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S11752
Buksh O, Jar A, Khogeer A, et al. Thermoexpandable Memokath stent: usage and efficacy in ureteral and urethral strictures in Saudi Arabia. Urol Ann. 2024; 16(1): 98–103. https://doi.org/10.4103/UA.UA_160_22 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/ua.ua_160_22
Jordan GH, Wessells H, Secrest C, et al. Effect of a temporary thermo-expandable stent on urethral patency after dilation or internal urethrotomy for recurrent bulbar urethral stricture: results from a 1-year randomized trial. J Urol. 2013; 190(1): 130–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JURO.2013.01.014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.01.014
Armitage JN, Rashidian A, Cathcart PJ, et al. The thermo-expandable metallic stent for managing benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review. BJU Int. 2006; 98(4): 806–810. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1464-410X.2006.06399.X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06399.x
Lee G, Marathe S, Sabbagh S, et al. Thermo-expandable intra-prostatic stent in the treatment of acute urinary retention in elderly patients with significant co-morbidities. Int Urol Nephrol. 2005; 37(3): 501–504. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11255-005-2091-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-005-2091-2
Sethi K, Bozin M, Jabane T, et al. Thermo-expandable prostatic stents for bladder outlet obstruction in the frail and elderly population: an underutilized procedure? Investig Clin Urol. 2017; 58(6): 447–452. https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.2017.58.6.447 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.2017.58.6.447
Kimata R, Nemoto K, Tomita Y, et al. Efficacy of a thermoexpandable metallic prostate stent (Memokath) in elderly patients with urethral obstruction requiring long-term management with urethral Foley catheters. Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2015; 15(5): 553–558. https://doi.org/10.1111/GGI.12309 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ggi.12309
Schou-Jensen KS, Dahl C, Azawi NH. Prostate stent is an option for selected patients who are unsuitable for transurethral resection of the prostate [Internet]. Dan Med J. 2014 [cited 28-05-2024]; 61(10): A4937. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25283624/
Barber NJ, Roodhouse AJ, Rathenborg P, et al. Ease of removal of thermo-expandable prostate stents. BJU Int. 2005; 96(4): 578–580. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1464-410X.2005.05687.X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05687.x
Nguyen ALV, Verma I, Ferreira R, et al. A scoping review of office-based prostatic stents: past, present, and future of true minimally invasive treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. World J Urol. 2023; 41(11): 2925–2932. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00345-023-04508-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-023-04508-7
Porpiglia F, Fiori C, Amparore D, et al. Second-generation of temporary implantable nitinol device for the relief of lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia: results of a prospective, multicentre study at 1 year of follow-up. BJU Int. 2019; 123(6): 1061–1069. https://doi.org/10.1111/BJU.14608 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14608
Cornu JN, Zantek P, Burtt G, et al. Minimally invasive treatments for benign prostatic obstruction: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2023; 83(6): 534–547. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EURURO.2023.02.028 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2023.02.028
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Albert Arch, Andreas Thamsborg , Lilli Winck-Flyvholm, Rie Seifert , Mikkel Fode
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Acta Chirurgica Scandinavica Society owns the copyright for all material published until Volume 57 (2023) unless otherwise specified. As from Volume 59 (2024) all published articles, unless otherwise specified, are published under CC-BY licences, allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, with the condition of proper attribution to the original work.
