Section 81
Chapter 80,096

Comparison between Antegrade versus Retrograde Ureteral Stent Placement for Malignant Ureteral Obstruction

Kim, H.J.; Yoon, C.J.; Lee, S.; Lee, J.H.; Choi, W.S.; Lee, C.-H.

Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology Jvir 33(10): 1199-1206


ISSN/ISBN: 1535-7732
PMID: 35809804
Accession: 080095712

Download citation:  

To compare the technical success of antegrade (AUS) and retrograde ureteral stent placement (RUS) in patients with malignant ureteral obstruction (MUO) and to determine the predictors of technical failure of RUS. This study retrospectively included 61 AUS (44 patients) performed under fluoroscopic guidance and 76 RUS (55 patients) under cystoscopic guidance performed in patients with MUO from January 2019 to December 2020. Technical success rates of the two techniques were compared using an inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis. Logistic regression was used to identify predictive factors for technical failures. Technical success was achieved in 98.4% of the AUS group and 47.4% of the RUS group. After stabilized IPTW, the technical success rate was higher in the AUS group than in the RUS group (adjusted risk difference, 49.4% [95% CI, 35.4%-63.1%]). Independent predictors for technical failure of the RUS procedure were age ≥ 65 years (OR 5.56, 95% CI 1.73-21.27), ureteral orifice invasion (OR 4.21, 95% CI 1.46-13.46) and extrinsic cancer (OR 15.58, 95% CI 2.92-111.81). The technical success rate of AUS was higher than that of RUS in patients with MUO. RUS failure was associated with age ≥ 65 years, cancer with ureteral orifice invasion, and extrinsic ureteral obstruction.

PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90