To evaluate the indications and clinical outcomes of local anesthetic stenting in urological procedures, assessing its effectiveness, adverse effects, and patient tolerance.
Materials and Methods:
The systematic review was conducted in line with Cochrane and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines. MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register were searched up to September 2024 (PROSPERO—CRD42024596866). Studies with at least five patients, focusing on Double-J stent placement or exchange under local anesthesia, published in English, were included. Case reports, reviews, pediatric studies, and redundant older data were excluded. Data on study characteristics, patient demographics, procedural details, and outcomes, including success and complication rates, were extracted.
Results:
A total of 1725 patients and 1873 ureteral units were included, with studies that varied in sample size (6–463 patients) and included both stent placements (77.6%) and exchanges (22.4%). The overall success rate for local anesthetic stenting was 89%, with failure rates averaging 11%. Of reported studies, complications were reported in 8.68% (n = 76), predominantly Clavien–Dindo Grades I–II (5.94%) and III–IV (2.74%). Lidocaine jelly was the primary local anesthetic, with adjunct pharmacological interventions in some studies. Fluoroscopic guidance was used in 86.3% of cases, and both flexible and rigid cystoscopes were employed. Cost analysis consistently demonstrated significant cost savings with local anesthesia compared to general anesthesia. Patient satisfaction and pain scores showed variability, with many studies highlighting minimal discomfort and a strong willingness among patients to undergo the procedure again.
Conclusions:
Local anesthetic stenting is an effective alternative to general anesthesia, achieving a good success rate with a low risk of major complications. Although it offers significant cost savings and patient satisfaction is usually high, it does highlight the need for careful patient selection and counseling.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
SkolarikosA, JungH, NeisiusA, et al.; European Association of Urology. (2024). EAU Guidelines on Urolithiasis. In: EAU Guidelines 2024 Edition. European Association of Urology. https://uroweb.org/guidelines/urolithiasis
2.
AssimosD, CrisciA, CulkinD, et al.; CROES URS Global Study Group. 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):648–654; doi: 10.1111/bju.13250
3.
SivalingamS, Tamm-DanielsI, NakadaSY. Office-based ureteral stent placement under local anesthesia for obstructing stones is safe and efficacious. Urology, 2013; 81(3):498–502; doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2012.10.021
4.
KimHC, KimE, JeonYT, et al.Postanaesthetic emergence agitation in adult patients after general anaesthesia for urological surgery. J Int Med Res, 2015; 43(2):226–235; doi: 10.1177/0300060514562489
5.
BrangerN, LorussoV, PacchettiA, et al.Impact of long-term indwelling JJ stent on renal volume and renal function. Minerva Urol Nephrol, 2023; 75(6):752–760; doi: 10.2373/6/S2724-6051.22.04975-8
6.
VanoliS, Grobet-JeandinE, WindischO, et al.Evolution of anxiety management in prostate biopsy under local anesthesia: A narrative review. World J Urol, 2024; 42(1):43; doi: 10.1007/s00345-023-04723-2
7.
EscobarAJ, VasdevR, GalloM, et al.Self-adjusted nitrous oxide during urodynamic studies reduces patient pain without compromising study quality: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Eur Urol Open Sci, 2024; 68:25–31; doi: 10.1016/j.euros.2024.08.002
8.
AhmadI, Saeed PansotaM, TariqM, et al.Comparison between Double J (DJ) ureteral stenting and Percutaneous Nephrostomy (PCN) in obstructive uropathy. Pak J Med Sci, 2013; 29(3):725–729; doi: 10.1266/9/pjms.293.3563
9.
PietropaoloA, SeoaneLM, AbadiaAA, et al.Emergency upper urinary tract decompression: Double-J stent or nephrostomy? A European YAU/ESUT/EULIS/BSIR survey among urologists and radiologists. World J Urol, 2022; 40(7):1629–1636; doi: 10.1007/s00345-022-03979-4
10.
CumpstonM, LiT, PageMJ, et al.Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: A new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2019; 10(10):ED000142; doi: 10.1002/14651858.ED000142
11.
MoherD, LiberatiA, TetzlaffJ, et al.; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol, 2009; 62(10):1006–1012; doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.005
12.
AdeyojuAB, CollinsGN, BroomanP, et al.Outpatient flexible cystoscope-assisted insertion of ureteric catheters and ureteric stents. BJU Int, 1999; 83(7):748–750; doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.00994.x
13.
AndrioleGL, BettmannMA, GarnickMB, et al.Indwelling double-J ureteral stents for temporary and permanent urinary drainage: Experience with 87 patients. J Urol, 1984; 131(2):239–241; doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)50324-9
14.
CarrionA, D’AnnaM, Costa-GrauM, et al.Office stent placement under local anesthesia is a safe and efficient procedure for the management of multiple ureteral disorders. Actas Urol Esp (Engl Ed), 2018; 42(2):126–132; doi: 10.1016/j.acuro.2017.06.006
15.
CarrougetJ, AmmiM, LasockiS, et al.Double-J ureteral stent under local anesthesia for women. Can J Urol, 2014; 21(1):7120–7124.
16.
ConnellyZM, StolzleA, VanlangendonckRA, et al.Ureteral stenting in the clinic: A safe and cost-effective alternative to the operating room. Am J Clin Exp Urol, 2023; 11(4):304–311.
17.
DoerschKM, MachenGL, ThaiKH, et al.Feasibility and clinical outcomes of ureteral stenting in the office procedural suite. Can J Urol, 2018; 25(6):9596–9600.
18.
HusseinNS, NorazanMR. Impact of self-watching double j stent insertion on pain experience of male patients: A randomized control study using visual analog scale. ISRN Urol, 2013; 2013:523625; doi: 10.1155/2013/523625
19.
MasoodJ, IsmailM, El-HusseinyT, et al.‘An interventional urology list’—a novel concept for UK urological services. Ann R Coll Surg Engl, 2011; 93(1):27–30; doi: 10.1308/003588411X12851639107115
20.
McFarlaneJP, CowanC, HoltSJ, et al.Outpatient ureteric procedures: A new method for retrograde ureteropyelography and ureteric stent placement. BJU Int, 2001; 87(3):172–176; doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2001.02039.x
21.
NourparvarP, LeungA, ShrewsberryAB, et al.Safety and efficacy of ureteral stent placement at the bedside using local anesthesia. J Urol, 2016; 195(6):1886–1890; doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.11.083
22.
WangJY, ZhangHL, ZhuY, et al.Predicting the failure of retrograde ureteral stent insertion for managing malignant ureteral obstruction in outpatients. Oncol Lett, 2016; 11(1):879–883; doi: 10.3892/ol.2015.3961
23.
DindoD, DemartinesN, ClavienPA. Classification of surgical complications: A new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg, 2004; 240(2):205–213; doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae
24.
HannaB, ZhuoK, ChalasaniV, et al.Association between ureteric stent dwell time and urinary tract infection. ANZ J Surg, 2021; 91(1–2):187–191; doi: 10.1111/ans.16414
25.
MassellaV, Juliebø-JonesP, PietropaoloA, et al.Outcomes associated with the endourological management of stent encrustation: Findings from a literature review on behalf of the EAU YAU Urolithiasis Group. Curr Urol Rep, 2023; 24(4):187–199; doi: 10.1007/s11934-023-01144-x
26.
MilitaruA, BulaiCA, EneC, et al.Double J Stents and Reno-Ureteral Lithiasis: Dynamic changes in management during the COVID-19 pandemic. Life (Basel), 2023; 13(11):2113; doi: 10.3390/life13112113
27.
DžakulaA, RelićD. Health workforce shortage—doing the right things or doing things right? Croat Med J, 2022; 63(2):107–109; doi: 10.3325/cmj.2022.63.107
28.
ChengE, DavuluriM, LewickiPJ, et al.Developments in optimizing transperineal prostate biopsy. Curr Opin Urol, 2022; 32(1):85–90; doi: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000000947
HoganD, KanagarajahA, YaoHH, et al.Local versus general anesthesia transperineal prostate biopsy: Tolerability, cancer detection, and complications. BJUI Compass, 2021; 2(6):428–435; doi: 10.1002/bco2.106
31.
LeachGE. Local anesthesia for urologic procedures. Urology, 1996; 48(2):284–288; doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(96)00181-1
32.
NeumanMD, SieberF, DillaneD. Comparative Effectiveness Research on Spinal versus General Anesthesia for Surgery in Older Adults. Anesthesiology, 2023; 139(2):211–223; doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000004604
33.
BarbosaFT, CastroAA. Neuraxial anesthesia versus general anesthesia for urological surgery: Systematic review. Sao Paulo Med J, 2013; 131(3):179–186; doi: 10.1590/1516-3180.2013.1313535
34.
GordetskyJ, BendanaE, O’BrienJ, et al.(Almost) painless surgery: A historical review of the evolution of intraurethral anesthesia in urology. Urology, 2011; 77(1):12–16; doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2010.03.068
35.
SchembriM, AgarwalV, PietropaoloA, et al.Outcomes of loco-regional anaesthesia in ureteroscopy for stone disease: A systematic review. Curr Opin Urol, 2020; 30(5):726–734.
36.
WestwoodJ, GeraghtyR, JonesP, et al.Rezum: A new transurethral water vapour therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Ther Adv Urol, 2018; 10(11):327–333.
37.
WeibelS, RückerG, EberhartLH, et al.Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: A network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2020; 10(10):CD012859; doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012859.pub2
AnglinC, KnollP, MuddB, et al.Music’s effect on pain relief during outpatient urological procedures: A single center, randomized control trial focusing on gender differences. Transl Androl Urol, 2021; 10(6):2332–2339; doi: 10.2103/7/tau-20-1311
40.
KyriakidesR, JonesP, GeraghtyR, et al.Effect of music on outpatient urological procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis from the European Association of Urology Section of Uro-Technology. J Urol, 2018; 199(5):1319–1327; doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.11.117
41.
SaraogiM, GeraghtyRM, HameedB, et al.Role of complementary medicine (music, acupuncture, acupressure, TENS and audio-visual distraction) in Shockwave Lithotripsy (SWL): A systematic review from EAU Sections of Urolithiasis (EULIS) and Uro-Technology (ESUT). Urology, 2020; 145:38–51; doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2020.06.035
42.
ChapmanRA, SomaniBK, RobertsonA, et al.Decreasing cost of flexible ureterorenoscopy: Single-use laser fiber cost analysis. Urology, 2014; 83(5):1003–1005.
43.
MehmiA, JonesP, SomaniBK. Current status and role of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in endourology. Urology, 2021; 148:26–31.
