Investigation of a Novel Degradable Ureteral Stent in a Porcine Model

No AccessJournal of UrologyInvestigative Urology1 Sep 2008Investigation of a Novel Degradable Ureteral Stent in a Porcine Modelis companion ofRole of Ureteral Stenting After Uncomplicated Ureteroscopy for Distal Ureteral Stones: A Randomized, Controlled TrialIn Vitro Evaluation of Nitinol Urological Retrieval Coil and Ureteral Occlusion Device: Retropulsion and Holmium Laser Fragmentation Efficiency Boris A. Hadaschik, Ryan F. Paterson, Ladan Fazli, Kenneth W. Clinkscales, Shalaby W. Shalaby, and Ben H. Chew Boris A. HadaschikBoris A. Hadaschik Prostate Centre at Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada , Ryan F. PatersonRyan F. Paterson Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada , Ladan FazliLadan Fazli Prostate Centre at Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada , Kenneth W. ClinkscalesKenneth W. Clinkscales Poly-Med, Inc., Anderson, South Carolina , Shalaby W. ShalabyShalaby W. Shalaby Poly-Med, Inc., Anderson, South Carolina , and Ben H. ChewBen H. Chew Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.05.003AboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract Purpose: Ureteral stents often result in patient morbidity and the potential for a forgotten stent. When the suture tether is detached, a secondary procedure is required for removal. Previous attempts at developing biodegradable ureteral stents have been unsuccessful since those stents were not biocompatible or they failed to degrade in timely fashion. We evaluated a new biodegradable Double-J® stent in a porcine model. Materials and Methods: A total of 36 Yorkshire pigs were stented unilaterally with a biodegradable Uriprene™ stent or a standard biostable control stent. Excretory urograms, and blood and urine tests were performed at weeks 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 10. Four animals per group were sacrificed after 2, 4, 7 and 10 weeks to determine stent degradation and obtain samples for pathological evaluation. Results: Degradable ureteral stents began to degrade at 3 weeks. By weeks 7 and 10, 60% and 100% of the stents, respectively, were fully degraded. There was no significant difference in laboratory parameters or the amount of hydronephrosis between the 2 groups. However, ureteral dilatation was significantly more pronounced in the control group than in the Uriprene group. The novel stent was biocompatible on histological evaluation and it led to significantly less urinary tract infections than in controls. Conclusions: The novel Uriprene stents provided drainage similar to that of regular stents and they were completely degraded by 10 weeks. Moreover, these stents resulted in less ureteral dilatation and fewer positive urine cultures. Biocompatibility was good and human trials will be forthcoming. References 1 : Indwelling ureteral stents: evaluation of symptoms, quality of life and utility. J Urol2003; 169: 1065. Link, Google Scholar 2 : Characteristics of bacterial colonization and urinary tract infection after indwelling of Double-J ureteral stent. Urology2003; 62: 214. Google Scholar 3 : Febrile complications following insertion of 100 Double-J ureteral stents. J Endourol2005; 19: 147. Google Scholar 4 : Polyurethane internal ureteral stents in treatment of stone patients: morbidity related to indwelling times. J Urol1991; 146: 1487. Link, Google Scholar 5 : The forgotten indwelling ureteral stent: a urological dilemma. J Urol1995; 153: 1817. Link, Google Scholar 6 : The indwelling ureteric stent: a 'friendly' procedure with unfriendly high morbidity. BJU Int2000; 85: 408. Google Scholar 7 : Clinical features determining the fate of a long-term, indwelling, forgotten Double-J stents. Urol Res2004; 32: 416. Google Scholar 8 : Can the complicated forgotten indwelling ureteric stents be lethal?. Int Urol Nephrol2005; 37: 541. Google Scholar 9 : Efficacy of polyglycolic acid (PGA) tubing stents in ureteroureterostomies. Urol Res1984; 12: 291. Google Scholar 10 : Evaluation of a dissolvable ureteral drainage stent in a swine model. J Urol2002; 168: 808. Link, Google Scholar 11 : The morphological, in situ effects of a self-reinforced bioabsorbable polylactide (SR-PLA 96) ureteric stent: an experimental study. J Urol2000; 164: 1360. Link, Google Scholar 12 : Evaluation of the use of a biodegradable ureteral stent after retrograde endopyelotomy in a porcine model. J Urol2002; 167: 2198. Link, Google Scholar 13 : Use of a temporary ureteral drainage stent after uncomplicated ureteroscopy: results from a phase II clinical trial. J Urol2003; 169: 1682. Link, Google Scholar 14 : Absorbable Endo-urological Devices and Applications Therefor. United States Patent Application: Serial No. 11/204 : 2005. Google Scholar 15 : Experience with new Double-J ureteral catheter stent. J Urol1978; 120: 678. Abstract, Google Scholar 16 : Advances in ureteral stent design. J Endourol2003; 17: 195. Google Scholar 17 : Impact on ureteral peristalsis in a stented ureter: An experimental study in the pig. Urol Res2002; 30: 213. Google Scholar 18 : The effects of Double J stenting on unobstructed ureters: An experimental and clinical study. Br J Urol1985; 57: 630. Google Scholar 19 : Optimal prevention and management of proximal ureteral stent migration and remigration. J Urol2001; 166: 890. Link, Google Scholar 20 : Effect of surface-modified LPPE on bacterial attachment. Trans Soc Biomater2001; 24: 507. Google Scholar © 2008 by American Urological AssociationFiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byChew B, Paterson R, Clinkscales K, Levine B, Shalaby S and Lange D (2018) In Vivo Evaluation of the Third Generation Biodegradable Stent: A Novel Approach to Avoiding the Forgotten Stent SyndromeJournal of Urology, VOL. 189, NO. 2, (719-725), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2013.Chew B, Lange D, Paterson R, Hendlin K, Monga M, Clinkscales K, Shalaby S and Hadaschik B (2018) Next Generation Biodegradable Ureteral Stent in a Yucatan Pig ModelJournal of Urology, VOL. 183, NO. 2, (765-771), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2010.Related articlesJournal of Urology17 Jul 2008Role of Ureteral Stenting After Uncomplicated Ureteroscopy for Distal Ureteral Stones: A Randomized, Controlled TrialJournal of Urology28 Jul 2008In Vitro Evaluation of Nitinol Urological Retrieval Coil and Ureteral Occlusion Device: Retropulsion and Holmium Laser Fragmentation Efficiency Volume 180Issue 3September 2008Page: 1161-1166 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2008 by American Urological AssociationKeywordsmetabolismuretermaterials testingswinestentsAcknowledgmentsEstelle Li and Ian Dobson provided assistance. The Uriprene stent was developed at Poly Med, Inc. for marketing by Indevus Pharmaceuticals, Lexington, Massachusetts.MetricsAuthor Information Boris A. Hadaschik Prostate Centre at Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada More articles by this author Ryan F. Paterson Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada More articles by this author Ladan Fazli Prostate Centre at Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada More articles by this author Kenneth W. Clinkscales Poly-Med, Inc., Anderson, South Carolina More articles by this author Shalaby W. Shalaby Poly-Med, Inc., Anderson, South Carolina More articles by this author Ben H. Chew Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Financial interest and/or other relationship with Indevus Pharmaceuticals, Boston Scientific Microvasive, Percsys and LMA Switzerland. More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...