Next Article in Journal
Pancreaticobiliary Reflux with Normal and Relatively Long Common Channels Causing Cholelithiasis and Acute Pancreatitis in Children
Previous Article in Journal
Neuromechanical Models of Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Conditioned on Reaction Time: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JCM
Volume 13
Issue 24
10.3390/jcm13247649
jcm-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Double-J Ureteral Stenting in Obstetrics and Gynecology: Pivotal or Problematic?

by
Viorel-Dragos Radu
1,2,
Radu Cristian Costache
1,2,
Pavel Onofrei
3,4,*,
Pavel Banov
5,
Feras Al Jaafari
6,7,
Ingrid-Andrada Vasilache
8,
Demetra Socolov
8 and
Rodica Radu
9
1
Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy “Gr. T. Popa”, 700115 Iasi, Romania
2
Urological Department, “C.I. Parhon” University Hospital, 700115 Iasi, Romania
3
Department of Morpho-Functional Sciences II, Faculty of Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy “Gr. T. Popa”, 700115 Iasi, Romania
4
Urological Department, Elytis Hope Hospital, 700010 Iasi, Romania
5
Department of Urology and Surgical Nephrology, “Nicolae Testemițanu” State University of Medicine and Pharmacy, MD-2004 Chisinau, Moldova
6
Urology Department, Victoria Hospital, NHS Fife, Kirkcaldy KY2 5AH, Scotland, UK
7
School of Medicine, University of St Andrews, St Andrews KY16 9AJ, Scotland, UK
8
Department of Mother and Child Care, University of Medicine and Pharmacy “Gr. T. Popa”, 700115 Iasi, Romania
9
Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy “Gr. T. Popa”, 700115 Iasi, Romania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13(24), 7649; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13247649
Submission received: 4 December 2024 / Revised: 14 December 2024 / Accepted: 15 December 2024 / Published: 16 December 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Obstetrics & Gynecology)
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background and Objectives: Double-J stents are urinary catheters that are frequently used in urology. They are now also used in other specialist areas such as obstetrics and gynecology. However, the use of double-J stents is not without side effects. The aim of this review was to highlight the indications and possible adverse effects of the use of these stents in obstetrics and gynecology. Materials and Methods: We analyzed works published after 1995 in the PUBMED, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases related to the use of double-J stents in obstetrics and gynecology, as well as reported adverse events. We carried out a narrative review of the available literature on this topic. Results: We identified 69 relevant publications that we included in the review. In obstetrics, indications include the treatment of gestational hydronephrosis, some urological conditions during pregnancy, such as obstructive urinary calculi, with or without superinfection, or intraoperative use for cesarean section or hysterectomy after cesarean section, to protect from, or to solve, ureteral lesions. In gynecology, they are used preoperatively or intraoperatively to protect the ureter during gynecological operations in the pelvic area or postoperatively to repair some ureteral injuries. They are also indicated for ureteral obstructions that occur after pelvic radiotherapy for gynecological neoplasms. Complications associated with the use of double-J stents include more frequent urinary tract infections, lower urinary tract symptoms, calcifications and misplacements. Conclusions: Double-J stents are widely used in obstetrics and gynecology and are characterized by good efficiency and safety, although some side effects may occur (lower urinary tract symptoms, hematuria, complications in birth outcomes), which do not limit their use. Summary of evidence: In this review, we analyzed the indications and complications of double-J ureteral stenting in obstetric and gynecologic patients. We found that the procedure is safe, both in the treatment of ureteral obstruction and in the resolution of postoperative complications. No serious complications of ureteral stenting have been noted that would constitute a contraindication to its use. Future prospective studies in large patient cohorts are necessary to validate our data.

1. Introduction

Double-J ureteral stents are urinary catheters that are frequently used in urology for a variety of operations. They are used to drain urine from a potentially obstructed ureter and to stabilize the ureter after surgery [1]. These catheters are also used in other specialties [2,3,4,5] when performing abdominal surgeries that may involve the urinary system. Double-J stents are now widely used in obstetrics and gynecology. Many conditions benefit from the insertion of these stents, so obstetrics and gynecology physicians are relatively frequently confronted with patients with indwelling double-J stents or in whom there is an indication for the insertion of a double-J stent to resolve some gynecologic complications and conditions that occur in obstetrics or secondary to pregnancy.
However, there is controversy in the literature about the efficacy and safety of the use of double-J stents, including in obstetrics and gynecology. Some studies report numerous side effects, some of them serious [6,7], which would contraindicate or drastically limit their use [8].
In recent years, the number of articles reporting on the use of double-J stents in obstetrics and gynecology has increased, but there is no review in the existing literature that summarizes all this information.
We therefore reviewed the literature to determine the current indications for double-J stent use and reported adverse events in obstetrics and gynecology to help gynecologists better understand when double-J stents should be used and the risks associated with them and also to help urologists evaluate the indications for double-J stent placement when faced with a urologic complication in obstetrics and gynecology.

2. Materials and Methods

We searched the PUBMED, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases for relevant articles in English and French published after 1995. The search was conducted between 1 September and 30 September 2024, using the following keywords: “Double-J stent”, “pregnancy”, “obstetrics”, “gynecology”, “complications of double-J stent in pregnancy”, “complications of double-J stent in gynecology”, and “complications of double-J stent in obstetrics”. All articles on double-J stents in obstetrics and gynecology were analyzed, including systematic reviews, meta-analyses, cohort and case–control studies, and clinical case reports. The literature search yielded 252 publications, which were screened for eligibility by 3 researchers. We excluded duplicate articles, articles without an abstract, and those with an abstract in a language other than English or French. We also excluded articles that were not relevant or not related to our topic. We finally identified 69 full-text research articles on our topic, which we included in the analysis.
In total, 22 articles dealt with the use of double-J stents in obstetrics; 15 dealt with gestational hydronephrosis and ureteral stone obstruction in pregnancy, and 8 addressed pregnant women with placenta accreta. A total of 21 articles dealt with the use of double-J stents in gynecology; 2 of them dealt with the use of stents in gynecological pelvic neoplasms, 2 articles addressed the use of double-J stents in retroperitoneal fibrosis as a result of radiotherapy for female genital neoplasms, 6 articles dealt with ureteral stenting before and during surgery for female genital neoplasms, and 11 articles dealt with ureteral lesions discovered after hysterectomy for genital neoplasms. A total of 41 articles dealt with the occurrence of complications associated with the use of double-J stents in obstetrics and gynecology, including 7 articles on the calcification of double-J stents, 7 articles on the risk of infectious complications associated with the use of double-J stents, 10 articles on lower urinary tract symptoms, 7 articles on uretero-iliac fistula in patients with indwelling double-J stents, 3 articles on the misplacement and/or migration of double-J stents, 1 article on the rupture of the stent, 3 articles on the incorrect insertion of the catheter, and 4 articles on the consequences of pregnancy resulting from the use of double-J stents. Of these articles, 10 articles dealing with both indications and complications of double-J stents in obstetrics and/or gynecology were cited between 2 and 4 times in this review.

3. Results

3.1. Utilization of Double-J Stents in Obstetrics

A.
Gestational hydronephrosis and ureteral stone obstruction in pregnancy
Gestational hydronephrosis occurs in 0.5% of all pregnancies [9], with most being asymptomatic [10]. If the degree of hydronephrosis is greater, then pain [11] or superinfection [12] may occur, necessitating the insertion of a double-J stent for pain relief or the drainage of the infected hydronephrosis [13,14], even if the hydronephrosis is associated with the presence of a perirenal urinoma [15]. The insertion of the double-J stent is usually indicated after conservative medical treatment has been attempted. In a study by Tsai et al. comparing 25 patients with conservative treatment and 25 patients with double-J stenting for the treatment of hydronephrosis, they found that double-J stenting had better efficacy in successful treatment compared with conservative treatment (100% vs. 80%, p = 0.018). However, due to complications in four cases (16%) (discomfort with the stent and flank pain), the authors concluded that conservative treatment should be attempted first, and only if double-J stent insertion has failed. It should be noted that the double-J stents remained in place for an average of 4.5 ± 1.3 months [9]. Ureteral stents have been used as an alternative to percutaneous nephrostomy [16] or conservative treatment [17]. In a study of 84 patients, Şimşir et al. compared the success rate of double-J stenting with that of percutaneous nephrostomy in the treatment of symptomatic gestational hydronephrosis. They found that secondary intervention was required more frequently in the double-J group (34.7% vs. 15.7%, p = 0.0018) due to higher degrees of hydronephrosis and pain attributable to the dislocation or encrustation of the double-J. In addition, the time before a secondary intervention was needed was shorter in the double-J group (18 days vs. 33 days, p = 0.0025 [16]). Double-J stents are inserted under local anesthesia [12] and can remain in place for an average of 9 weeks [17] until after delivery [17,18] and can be replaced 4–5 weeks after delivery [5].
Renoureteral lithiasis over 8 mm in pregnancy can cause hydronephrosis with renal colic [19] and superinfection, a high degree of hydronephrosis, fever, leukocytosis, elevated creatinine, and CRP [13]. The indication for the insertion of the double-J stent in lithiasis would be ureteral stones. When inserting the double-J stent, the chances of eliminating ureteral stones while wearing the stent are low [20]. Therefore, several studies have compared the insertion of double-J stents with retrograde ureteroscopy in pregnancy. Some show the superiority of ureteroscopy [21], others recommend the insertion of the double-J stent as a first step [20] or assume that both have a similar efficiency [22]. However, a double-J stent has also been inserted postoperatively during ureteroscopy, but it had already been suppressed during pregnancy [21].
Most studies consider double-J stenting to be a simple, efficient, and safe procedure with no significant side effects [12,14,19,22]. However, Tan et al. reported a success rate of only 83.3% in 5 of the 30 patients studied in whom ureteral stenting was attempted but stent placement failed, necessitating percutaneous nephrostomy [22].
B.
Placenta accreta spectrum
The presence of a placenta accreta presents obstetricians with numerous difficulties and necessitates a cesarean section, which may later require a hysterectomy for hemostasis [23,24]. These procedures can result in bladder ruptures that extend close to the ureteral orifices and require the insertion of double-J stents to protect them [25]. Although the most common injuries during these operations are bladder injuries [26], partial or complete ureteral injuries have also been described in the literature [27,28]. To avoid these, some authors have used double-J ureteral stents preoperatively and report either a reduction in the rate of ureteral injury [24] or no reduction [29]. In a comparative study by Crocetto et al., in which they analyzed 24 (54.5%) patients with placenta accreta and ureteral stents placed prior to hysterectomy and 20 (45.5%) patients with placenta accreta and no preoperatively placed double-J stent, they found the same rate of intraoperative bladder injury (25% vs. 10%, p = 0.21) without detecting ureteral injuries, calling into question the efficacy of preoperative ureteral stenting in preventing bladder and ureteral injuries at the time of cesarean hysterectomy [29]. For ureteral lesions detected intraoperatively during cesarean section or hysterectomy, the insertion of a double-J stent is the treatment of choice, although some authors still prefer percutaneous nephrostomy [27]. In the case of total pelvic ureteral lesion, ureterovesical reimplantation with the insertion of a double-J stent is indicated [27]. Ureteral lesions are occasionally discovered postoperatively, in which case the double-J stent can also be inserted anterograde, if retrograde, transurethral insertion has failed [30]. In a case of a posthysterectomy hematoma with the extrinsic compression of the ureter, a double-J stent was inserted for 3 months until the pelvic hematoma regressed [26].

3.2. Utilization of Double-J Stents in Gynecology

A.
Genital neoplasms of the pelvis with secondary ureterohydronephrosis
Obstructive uropathy is a common finding in advanced cervix carcinoma [31]. In these cases, a double-J ureteral stent is recommended to facilitate urinary passage. In a retrospective study, Warli et al. examined 88 patients with advanced cervical cancer in whom double-J stent insertion was successful in 43 (48.9%) cases and unsuccessful in 45 (51.1%) cases. They found that the predictors of successful double-J stent insertion were a lower level of hydronephrosis (OR: 18.203, p = 0.001), urea (OR: 4.207, p = 0.037), and creatinine (OR, 6.923, p = 0.004) and a lower stage of cervical cancer (OR: 4.125, p = 0.022) [31]. In malignant ureteral obstruction mainly due to cervical cancer [31], double-J stents can be used to avoid percutaneous nephrostomy, but they need to be replaced frequently [32], so the use of metal stents is preferred, as they require fewer replacements and have a better cost–benefit ratio [32].
B.
Retroperitoneal fibrosis with unilateral or bilateral ureterohydronephrosis secondary to radiotherapy for pelvic genital neoplasms or breast neoplasms
Retroperitoneal fibrosis occurring after radiotherapy can cause ureteral obstruction and secondary chronic renal failure. In these cases, the first treatment option is ureteral stenting with double-J stents [33]. They can remain in place over the long term, and ureterolysis can be performed later [33]. Metal 6 Fr stents can also be used successfully as an alternative to 6–7 Fr polyurethane double-J stents [34].
C.
Ureteral stenting before interventions for endometriosis and uterine neoplasms
Cases with endometriosis of the bladder or around the pelvic ureters have been reported in the literature [4,35,36,37] in which the authors inserted bilateral double-J ureteral stents via cystoscopy prior to laparoscopic or robotic surgery [38]. Piryev et al. published a comparative study of three groups of patients undergoing deep endometriosis surgery. In the first group, the double-J stents were left in place for 2 weeks postoperatively; in group 2, the double-J stents were removed immediately at the end of the procedure, and in group 3, the double-J stents were not inserted [37]. As expected, they found that the groups with double-J stents had a higher rate of urinary tract infections, especially in group 1. Surprisingly, however, the rate of intraoperative ureteral injury was the same in all three groups, suggesting that the insertion of double-J stents offered no advantage in protecting against intraoperative ureteral injury. Ureteral stents were also inserted when only the bladder dome was removed, without performing a hysterectomy [39]. A case has also been reported in which fluorescent stents were used preoperatively during hysterectomy for uterine cancer [40].
D.
Stenting during operations for gynecological pathologies
Total hysterectomies with pelvic lymph dissection, which are indicated for uterine neoplasms [41] or uterine fibroids [42], carry the risk of ureteral injury, regardless of whether the procedure is performed open or laparoscopically [43,44]. In a study by Yan et al., of 117 patients treated for cervical cancer who underwent laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy, a case of postoperative ureteral fistula requiring the cystoscopic insertion of a double-J stent that was left in place for 8 weeks was described [43]. To avoid accidental ureteral injury during hysterectomy, double-J stents are sometimes inserted preoperatively to protect the ureters, and fluorescent catheters are preferred [45]. In most cases, ureteral lesions are detected intraoperatively [41,46], necessitating ureterovesical reimplantation with double-J stents [41] or end-to-end ureteral reanastomosis using double-J stents [47]. In a report by Han et al. on 12 cases of ureteral transection during gynecologic laparoscopy, ureteroureterostomy was performed in eleven cases and laparoscopic ureteroneocystostomy with a double-J stent was performed in one case. These stents were left in place for a period of 73 days [44]. Other studies report that double-J stents inserted during laparoscopic repair remain in place for between 6 and 16 weeks [41]. In other cases, ureteral lesions are discovered late postoperatively, usually in the form of ureterovaginal fistulas [48]. In these cases, a double-J stent is placed either by cystoscopy [49] or by ureteroscopy [48], which is the recommended initial treatment [49]. To improve the cure rate with ureteral stenting, Deng et al. recommend prior ureteroscopy to visualize the ureteral lesion and decide whether double-J stenting with 4.7 Fr/26 cm should be omitted and ureteroneocystostomy should be performed from the beginning if the rupture is more than half of the ureteral circumference [48]. A study by Chung et al. found that the most common ureteral injuries occurred after gynecologic procedures, mostly laparoscopic. The diagnosis was made a median of 17.4 days (range 0–68 days) after surgery, and the median time between injury and stenting was 19.4 days (0–63 days). Successful retrograde stenting was achieved in 18 cases. In one case where double-J stenting failed, percutaneous nephrostomy was required. Ureteral strictures were reported after a median follow-up of 9.7 months (range, 1 month to 2 years), demonstrating that in some cases, double-J stenting failed to prevent this complication [49]. The most common gynecologic surgeries in which ureteral injuries occur are hysterectomies, but they can also occur in cesarean sections and cesarean hysterectomies where the retention time of the double-J stents is 6–8 weeks [46]. The success rate after double-J stenting is higher after obstetric and gynecologic procedures than after urologic and abdominal procedures [46]. A case of spontaneous ureteral rupture after chemotherapy for cervical cancer has also been reported [50], with secondary ureterohydronephrosis, in which a double-J stent was inserted, leading to the conclusion that in cases of ureterohydronephrosis before chemotherapy, it would be advisable to insert a double-J stent in advance to avoid such incidents. In addition, a case of pyosalpinx with ureteral compression and secondary ureterohydronephrosis was reported in which a double-J ureteral stent was inserted for desobstruction [51]. The indications for ureteral stenting in obstetrics and gynecology are summarized in Table 1.

3.3. The Complications of Using Double-J Stents in Obstetrics and Gynecology

A.
Calcifications of the double-J stents
Despite the wide use of double-J stents in obstetrics and gynecology, we found only six articles [22,51,52,53,54,55] reporting calcifications of double-J stents. In one pregnant woman, the calcification of the catheter on both the proximal and distal loops was reported only one week after catheter insertion, which consisted of calcium phosphate and required endoscopic bladder lithotripsy for removal [52]. In a 40-year-old female patient, calcifications occurred in both the proximal and distal loops after 4 years [56]. Among 30 pregnant women who underwent double-J stents for intractable flank pain or flank pain with sepsis, calcifications occurred in 3 of them (10%) when the stent was removed [53]. However, in a series of over 50 cases, the incrustation rate was only 3.84% [55]. Due to the incrustation, the double-J stent can hardly ever be removed [22].
B.
The risk of infection in double-J stent carriers
As the risk of infection in double-J stent wearers is recognized in the literature [57,58], it was to be expected that studies on this topic would be highlighted. In a study, Chen et al., who investigated the incidence of acute pyelonephritis in double-J stent carriers compared to non-carriers, found a higher incidence of pyelonephritis in pregnant patients with double-J stents compared to pregnant patients without double-J stents (9% vs. 4%). In general, the risk of pyelonephritis is higher in pregnant women with double-J stents than in women without double-J stents [58], and pregnancy has also been shown to be a risk factor (p < 0.01) for lower urinary tract infection in patients with double-J stents [6]. Reflux pyelonephritis in patients with double-J stents can have an unfavorable clinical course and lead to urosepsis [18]. There is also an increased risk of bacterial colonization, in both the proximal and distal loop [6]. The occurrence of a psoas abscess requiring drainage was reported in a pregnant patient who had a double-J stent inserted due to infected hydronephrosis [59]. An infection rate of 20.8% was reported in pregnant patients who had double-J stents [60], although no urinary tract infections were reported in other studies, even when the catheters were worn for more than 2 months [17]. The risk of pyelonephritis has also been studied in patients undergoing double-J stent insertion for malignant obstruction, with no evidence of increased risk [61]. In a recent study, Anton et al. showed that pregnant women with double-J stents have an increased risk of multidrug-resistant urinary tract infections compared to pregnant women without double-J stents (12.85% vs. 0%, p = 0.01) [62].
C.
The presence of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTSs) and hematuria
The presence of lower urinary tract symptoms and hematuria in double-J stent wearers has also been reported in obstetric and gynecologic patients. For example, in a study by Lim et al. in patients with cervical cancer, endometrial cancer, and retroperitoneal fibrosis following radiotherapy for cervical cancer wearing a polyurethane double-J ureteral stent (Cook, IL, USA, 6 Fr, 24–26 cm), the occurrence of pollakiuria, urinary retention, urinary urge, intermittency, hesitancy, a feeling of incomplete bladder emptying, and interrupted urinary stream was reported. These symptoms improved over time but significantly reduced quality of life after 9 months [7]. However, the presence of voiding symptoms and discomfort did not require double-J stent suppression [12]. Also, in pregnant women with ureteral lithiasis in whom double-J stents were inserted, stent tolerability was poor due to low urinary voiding phenomena, so the authors recommended ureteroscopy instead of double-J stent insertion [63]. Similarly, Çeçen et al. recommended conservative medical treatment instead of double-J stent insertion for hydronephrosis in pregnancy. They were unable to demonstrate a reduction in complication rate, postpartum pain score, and permanent hydronephrosis (p > 0.05) in patients with double-J stents compared to patients without double-J stents, even though they reported no serious complications during or after double-J stent insertion [17]. A 29.2% incidence of hematuria and a 20.8% incidence of lower urinary tract phenomena were also reported in pregnant women [60]. Another study reported a 17% incidence of hematuria and LUTSs after double-J insertion during pregnancy [53]. Even though the complication rate after double-J insertion is up to 45%, including LUTSs, these complications were minor (classified according to Clavien–Dindo 1, 2, and 3) [20]. However, some authors reported a low incidence of bladder irritation symptoms and hematuria [24]. Regarding the risks of the preoperative installation of double-J stents prior to gynecologic surgery, it was found that patients with preoperative stents operated on for malignant disease had a higher risk of urinary tract infection, re-stenting, hydronephrosis, and readmission compared to patients operated on for benign disease [64]. As an alternative to double-J stenting, Liang et al. suggested the use of ureteral catheters instead of double-J stents in patients with placenta accreta spectrum who underwent hysterectomy and demonstrated a lower risk of bladder irritation (aOR, 0.186; 95% CI, 0.057–0.605, p = 0.005), hematuria (aOR, 0.011; 95% CI, 0.001–0.136, p < 0.001), and lower back pain (aOR, 0.075; 95% CI, 0.022–0.261, p < 0.001) [24].
D.
Ureteroiliac fistula in chronic double-J stent wearers
Chronic carriers of double-J stents, especially those with retroperitoneal fibrosis after radiotherapy for pelvic genital neoplasms [8,65], may develop compression necrosis leading to the development of a fistula between the ureter and the iliac artery. Patients usually present with intermittent hematuria [66], but they can also present with massive hematuria and hemorrhagic shock, with a mortality of 7–23% [67]. Usually, the fistula does not occur until months or even years after the insertion of the double-J stent [68,69]. Treatment usually consists of the insertion of a stent into the iliac artery or open surgery [66,70]. Sometimes the fistula can occur bilaterally [68], at different intervals, and sometimes it can even occur after 2 days [69].
E.
Misplacement, migration, or clogging of the double-J stent
Double-J stent migration has been reported in 3 pregnant women out of 30, in whom they were implanted due to hydronephrosis with or without ureteral lithiasis and required repositioning [53]. In one pregnant woman, a double-J stent that had migrated into the cardiovascular system was objectified, and clinicians waited until after delivery to remove it. Sometimes, the double-J stent does not achieve efficient urinary drainage, and hydronephrosis persists or worsens, eventually requiring nephrectomy [27] or more frequent stent replacement compared to percutaneous nephrostomy [16].
F.
The impossibility of inserting the double-J stent or incorrect insertion
Double-J stents are placed preoperatively by cystoscopy or intraoperatively during open or laparoscopic gynecologic procedures. Cases have been reported in which the double-J stent could not be inserted intraoperatively, so a percutaneous nephrostomy had to be inserted [71]. In one case of retroperitoneal fibrosis following radiotherapy for uterine cancer, the catheter inserted via cystoscopy was mistakenly inserted into the vena cava [72]. In a series of 131 cases in which ureteral stenting was inserted, the pooled surgical success rate was 97% for the insertion of a double-J stent [20].
G.
Effects on birth and fetus
In the case of urosepsis in pregnant women due to obstructive pyelonephritis, the insertion of the double-J stent did not prevent fetal suffering in the event of septic shock [18]. No maternal complications or postpartum fetal distress were reported in pregnant women who underwent double-J stenting for renal colic [73]. A higher rate of cesarean section and a higher rate of postpartum urinary tract infection and an increased risk of the premature rupture of membranes were reported in pregnant women with urosepsis in whom a double-J stent was inserted and worn until delivery (aOR, 5.59; 95% CI, 2.02–15.40, p < 0.001) as well as a higher rate of preterm birth (aOR, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.15–5.33, p = 0.02), but without an increase in the incidence of pre-eclampsia (aOR, 2.07; 95% CI, 0.63–6.65, p = 0.22) or intrauterine growth restriction (aOR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.48–3.14, p = 0.66) [55,74]. A systematic review by Jin et al. examined the results of treatment with internal ureteral stents or ureteroscopy in pregnant women with urolithiasis; it was found that in the group with stents, the rate of normal fertility outcomes was 99% and the rate of preterm births and abortions was less than 1%, similar to that in pregnant women who underwent ureteroscopy and did not have ureteral stents [20].
A summary of complications associated with double-J stents being used in obstetrics and gynecology can be found in Table 2.

4. Strengths and Limitations

The major strength of our study lies in the compilation of information on the use of double-J stents in obstetrics and gynecology, indications and complications, and data that have been reported separately in the literature to date and generally on small patient groups. The present review is an up-to-date retrospective on the use of double-J stents in obstetrics and gynecology, which will be of interest to physicians in this specialty but also to urologists who have to intervene in such cases. Our study has several limitations. The studies included in the review are mostly retrospective studies or even clinical case reports, as these cases are rare, especially when it comes to obstetric and gynecological complications. Reports on the use of double-J stents often do not specify the type of catheter used, the length and thickness, and the duration of stenting implantation, which influences the reporting of their efficacy and, in particular, of their possible complications. Some of the studies included in this analysis reported the use of double-J stents without specifying their efficacy compared to patients in whom no double-J stents were used in the same context. There was a large heterogeneity of patients included in the study in terms of the number of patients, study period, and follow-up time.

5. Conclusions

Ureteral stenting has numerous indications in obstetrics and gynecology. It is a safe and effective method that is sometimes indispensable in resolving certain gynecological complications. The complication rate in double-J stents wearers is low, with a predominance of lower urinary tract symptoms, but this does not argue against the widespread use of double-J stents.

6. Future Directions

In the future, prospective studies on larger patient groups and also on particular patient groups (pregnant patients with recurrent urolithiasis) will be necessary to validate our results. In addition, the influence of catheter types (materials, thickness), stenting duration and the presence of biofilms on the efficiency of their use in obstetrics and gynecology needs to be analyzed.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, V.-D.R., P.O. and R.R.; methodology, V.-D.R. and R.C.C.; validation, P.B., I.-A.V. and D.S.; formal analysis, V.-D.R., P.O. and R.R.; investigation, R.C.C.; resources, R.C.C., I.-A.V. and D.S.; data curation, P.O.; writing—original draft preparation, V.-D.R.; writing—review and editing, P.O., P.B. and F.A.J.; visualization, P.O. and R.R.; supervision, V.-D.R., R.C.C. and F.A.J. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Leslie, S.W.; Sajjad, H. Double J Placement Methods Comparative Analysis. In StatPearls [Internet]; StatPearls Publishing: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2024. [Google Scholar]
  2. Barns, M.E.; Dinh Chau, M.V.; Teloken, P.E.; Hodder, R. The Use of Prophylactic Ureteric Stents in Major Abdomino-Pelvic Sarcoma Surgery: Risks, Benefits, and Potential Complications. Res. Rep. Urol. 2023, 15, 577–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Turunc, T.; Kuzgunbay, B.; Gul, U.; Ozkardes, H. Ureteral avulsion due to lumbar disc hernia repair. Can. J. Urol. 2010, 17, 5478–5479. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  4. Weingertner, A.S.; Rodriguez, B.; Ziane, A.; Gibon, E.; Thoma, V.; Osario, F.; Haddad, C.; Wattiez, A. The use of JJ stent in the management of deep endometriosis lesion, affecting or potentially affecting the ureter: A review of our practice. BJOG 2008, 115, 1159–1164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Sadan, O.; Berar, M.; Sagiv, R.; Dreval, D.; Gewurtz, G.; Korczak, D.; Zakut, H.; Bernstein, D. Ureteric stent in severe hydronephrosis of pregnancy. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 1994, 56, 79–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Akay, A.F.; Aflay, U.; Gedik, A.; Sahin, H.; Bircan, M.K. Risk factors for lower urinary tract infection and bacterial stent colonization in patients with a double J ureteral stent. Int. Urol. Nephrol. 2007, 39, 95–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Lim, J.S.; Sul, C.K.; Song, K.H.; Na, Y.G.; Shin, J.H.; Oh, T.H.; Kim, Y.H. Changes in Urinary Symptoms and Tolerance due to Long-term Ureteral Double-J Stenting. Int. Neurourol. J. 2010, 14, 93–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Saleem, M.; Pahuja, K.H.; Arnouk, A. Pelvic Irradiation: A Rare Cause of Concomitant Radiation Cystitis and Uretero-Iliac Artery Fistula Causing Gross Hematuria and Hemorrhagic Shock. Cureus 2022, 14, e25774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Tsai, Y.L.; Seow, K.M.; Yieh, C.H.; Chong, K.M.; Hwang, J.L.; Lin, Y.H.; Huang, L.W. Comparative study of conservative and surgical management for symptomatic moderate and severe hydronephrosis in pregnancy: A prospective randomized study. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2007, 86, 1047–1050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Bayraktar, Z.; Kahraman, Ş.T.; Alaç, E.S.; Yengel, İ.; Sarıkaya Kalkan, D. Maternal hydronephrosis in pregnant women without ureteral stones and characteristics of symptomatic cases who need treatment: A single-center prospective study with 1026 pregnant women. Arch. Ital. di Urol. e Androl. 2021, 93, 35–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Demir, M.; Yağmur, İ.; Pelit, E.S.; Katı, B.; Tunçekin, A.; Çiftçi, H. Comparison of Conservative and Surgical Treatments in Symptomatic Pregnancy Hydronephrosis. Urol. Int. 2021, 105, 1085–1091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Delakas, D.; Karyotis, I.; Loumbakis, P.; Daskalopoulos, G.; Kazanis, J.; Cranidis, A. Ureteral drainage by double-J-catheters during pregnancy. Clin. Exp. Obstet. Gynecol. 2000, 27, 200–202. [Google Scholar]
  13. Haberal, H.B.; Tonyali, S. Factors predicting the need for surgical intervention for hydronephrosis during pregnancy: A systematic review of the literature. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2024, 309, 1801–1806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Hosny, M.; Chan, K.; Ibrahim, M.; Sharma, V.; Vasdev, N. The Management of Symptomatic Hydronephrosis in Pregnancy. Cureus 2024, 16, e52146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Ushioda, N.; Matsuo, K.; Nagamatsu, M.; Kimura, T.; Shimoya, K. Maternal urinoma during pregnancy. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Res. 2008, 34, 88–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Şimşir, A.; Kızılay, F.; Semerci, B. Comparison of percutaneous nephrostomy and double J stent in symptomatic pregnancy hydronephrosis treatment. Turk. J. Med. Sci. 2018, 48, 405–411. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  17. Çeçen, K.; Ülker, K. The comparison of double J stent insertion and conservative treatment alone in severe pure gestational hydronephrosis: A case controlled clinical study. Sci. World J. 2014, 2014, 989173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Radu, V.D.; Costache, R.C.; Onofrei, P.; Antohi, L.; Bobeica, R.L.; Linga, I.; Tanase-Vasilache, I.; Ristescu, A.I.; Murgu, A.M.; Miftode, I.L.; et al. Factors Associated with Increased Risk of Urosepsis during Pregnancy and Treatment Outcomes, in a Urology Clinic. Medicina 2023, 59, 1972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Deng, S.; Guo, D.; Liu, L.; Wang, Y.; Fei, K.; Zhang, H. Preference for diagnosing and treating renal colic during pregnancy: A survey among Chinese urologists. Sci. Rep. 2024, 14, 2914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Jin, X.; Liu, B.; Xiong, Y.; Wang, Y.; Tu, W.; Shao, Y.; Zhang, L.; Wang, D. Outcomes of ureteroscopy and internal ureteral stent for pregnancy with urolithiasis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Urol. 2022, 22, 150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Hoşcan, M.B.; Ekinci, M.; Tunçkıran, A.; Oksay, T.; Özorak, A.; Özkardeş, H. Management of symptomatic ureteral calculi complicating pregnancy. Urology 2012, 80, 1011–1014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Tan, S.T.; Chen, X.; Sun, M.; Wu, B. The comparation of effects and security of double-J stent retention and ureteroscopy lithotripsy in the treatment of symptomatic ureteral calculi during pregnancy. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2018, 227, 32–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Giuseppe, C.; Salvatore, P.; Federica, C.; Francesco, L.; Francesco, D.; Alessandro, L.; Gloria, C. Urinary tract injuries during surgery for placenta accreta spectrum disorders. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2023, 287, 93–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Liang, S.; Lyu, J.; Shi, H.; Zhao, Y.; Chong, Y.; Hou, X.; Chen, L. Management strategy for urologic morbidity in surgery of placenta accreta spectrum: Stents or catheters? J. Matern.-Fetal Neonatal Med. 2023, 36, 2232076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Balan, R.; Radu, V.D.; Giușcă, S.E.; Costache, C.; Ristescu, C.; Puia, D.; Onofrei, P.; Onofriescu, M.; Tănase, A.; Popovici, R.; et al. A Rare Cause of Massive Hematuria: Placenta Percreta With Bladder Invasion. In Vivo 2021, 35, 3633–3639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Radu, V.D.; Pristavu, A.I.; Vinturache, A.; Onofrei, P.; Socolov, D.G.; Carauleanu, A.; Boiculese, L.; Scripcariu, S.I.; Costache, R.C. Risk Factors for Urological Complications Associated with Caesarean Section-A Case-Control Study. Medicina 2022, 58, 123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Rahoui, M.; Ouanes, Y.; Chaker, K.; Mourad Dali, K.; Bibi, M.; Sellami, A.; Ben Rhouma, S.; Nouira, Y. Functional outcomes of surgical treatment of ureteral injury following gynecological and obstetrical surgery. Ann. Med. Surg. 2022, 79, 104067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Jiménez-Vieyra, C.R.; Gómez-Suaste, A.; Hinojosa-Cruz, J.C.; García-Bello, J.A. Urological lesions in patients undergoing obstetric hysterectomy secondary due to abnormal placental insertion in a high specialty hospital. Cir. Cir. 2020, 88, 473–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Crocetto, F.; Esposito, R.; Saccone, G.; Della Corte, L.; Sarno, L.; Morlando, M.; Maruotti, G.M.; Migliorini, S.; D'Alessandro, P.; Arduino, B.; et al. Use of routine ureteral stents in cesarean hysterectomy for placenta accreta. J. Matern.-Fetal Neonatal Med. 2021, 34, 386–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Ustunsoz, B.; Ugurel, S.; Duru, N.K.; Ozgok, Y.; Ustunsoz, A. Percutaneous management of ureteral injuries that are diagnosed late after cesarean section. Korean J. Radiol. 2008, 9, 348–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Warli, S.M.; Tala, M.R.Z.; Wijaya, W.S. Predictive Factors of Successful Double J Stent Insertion Among Advanced Cervical Cancer Patients. World J. Oncol. 2024, 15, 239–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Cooper, D.M.; Lines, R.; Shergill, I. Cost-effectiveness of Resonance® metallic ureteral stent compared with standard polyurethane ureteral stents in malignant ureteric obstruction: A cost-utility analysis. BJUI Compass 2024, 5, 465–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Bilgo, A.; Koné, M.H.; Lamzaf, Y.; Benjafaar, A.; Saouli, A.; Karmouni, T.; Khader, K.E.; Koutani, A.; Andaloussi, A.A. Fibrose rétropéritonéale au CHU Ibn Sina de Rabat: À propos de 18 cas [Retroperitoneal fibrosis at the Ibn Sina University Hospital of Rabat: About 18 cases]. Pan Afr. Med. J. 2021, 38, 149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Borin, J.F.; Melamud, O.; Clayman, R.V. Initial experience with full-length metal stent to relieve malignant ureteral obstruction. J. Endourol. 2006, 20, 300–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Youssef, Y.; Neblett, M.F., 2nd; Cope, A.G.; Burnett, T.L.; VanBuren, W.M.; Anderson, K.T.; Khan, Z. Surgical Management of Endometriosis Involving the Bladder and Ureter. Urology 2024, 184, e258–e259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Bruneel, Y.; Ghysel, C.; Van Holsbeke, C.; Van Trappen, P. Fluorescence guidance during robotic resection of bladder wall endometriosis: Case report and technique. J. Surg. Case Rep. 2023, 2023, 604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Piriyev, E.; Schiermeier, S.; Römer, T. Are double-J stents in surgery for deep infiltrating endometriosis always necessary? A retrospective analysis. Wideochirurgia i Inne Tech. Maloinwazyjne 2022, 17, 533–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Guan, Z.; Soni, S.D.; Zhou, J.; Sunkara, S.; Guan, X. Cystoscopic-guided Robotic Resection of Bladder Trigone Endometriosis Nodule with Ureteral Preservation. J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 2022, 29, 930–931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Fernandes, R.P.; Centini, G.; Afors, K.; Puga, M.; Alves, J.; Wattiez, A. Standard Approach to Urinary Bladder Endometriosis. J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 2018, 25, 955–956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Kisu, I.; Iida, M.; Shiraishi, T.; Iijima, M.; Nakamura, K.; Matsuda, K.; Hirao, N. Real-time intraoperative ureter visualization with a novel Near-Infrared Ray Catheter during laparoscopic hysterectomy for gynecological cancer. J. Gynecol. Oncol. 2021, 32, e93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Bourdel, N.; Cognet, S.; Canis, M.; Berdugo, O.; Botchorishvili, R.; Rabischong, B.; Jardon, K. Laparoscopic Ureteroneocystostomy: Be Prepared! J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 2015, 22, 827–833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Okumura, A.; Morii, A.; Kiriyama, M. THREE CASES OF IATROGENIC URETERAL INJURY ASSOCIATED WITH TOTAL LAPAROSCOPIC HYSTERECTOMY. Nihon Hinyokika Gakkai Zasshi 2019, 110, 138–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Yan, X.; Li, G.; Shang, H.; Wang, G.; Chen, L.; Han, Y. Complications of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy-experience of 117 patients. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2009, 19, 963–967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Han, C.M.; Tan, H.H.; Kay, N.; Wang, C.J.; Su, H.; Yen, C.F.; Lee, C.L. Outcome of laparoscopic repair of ureteral injury: Follow-up of twelve cases. J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 2012, 19, 68–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Hamada, M.; Matsumi, Y.; Sekimoto, M.; Kurokawa, H.; Kita, M.; Kinoshita, H. Image Navigation Surgery With the Fluorescent Ureteral Catheter of Recurrent Tumors in the Pelvic Cavity. Dis. Colon. Rectum 2022, 65, e72–e76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Elawdy, M.M.; Osman, Y.; Awad, B.; El-Mekresh, M.; El-Halwagy, S. Iatrogenic ureteral injuries: A case series analysis with an emphasis on the predictors of late ureteral strictures and unfavorable outcome in different surgical specialties. Int. Urogynecology J. 2021, 32, 3031–3036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Avilés, R.; Bustos, B.; Chauvet, P.; François, M.; Canis, M.; Bourdel, N. Termino-terminal Ureteral Laparoscopic Anastomosis in a Case of Deep Infiltrating Endometriosis. J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 2020, 27, 1251–1252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Deng, L.; Tang, S.; Dou, Y.; Li, Y.; Liang, Z.; Wang, Y. The efficacy of ureteroscopic triage in increasing the cure rate of the first-line treatment for a ureterovaginal fistula resulting from radical hysterectomy. Heliyon 2023, 9, e18389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Chung, D.; Briggs, J.; Turney, B.W.; Tapping, C.R. Management of iatrogenic ureteric injury with retrograde ureteric stenting: An analysis of factors affecting technical success and long-term outcome. Acta Radiol. 2017, 58, 170–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Ikeda, S.; Ishikawa, M.; Kato, T. Spontaneous ureteral rupture during concurrent chemoradiotherapy in a woman with uterine cervical cancer. Gynecol. Oncol. Rep. 2015, 13, 18–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Chaker, K.; Ouanes, Y.; Azouz, E.; Trigui, M.; Madani, A.; Mosbahi, B.; Elabed, W.; Chbeb, O.; Bibi, M.; Dali, K.M.; et al. Acute obstructive pyelonephritis due to pyosalpinx: A case report. J. Med. Case Rep. 2023, 17, 166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Yanagi, M.; Kono, H.; Muramatsu, H.; Katsu, A.; Kimata, R.; Hamasaki, T.; Kondo, Y. Difficulty in Removing a Ureteral Stent post Childbirth due to Encrustation: A Case Report. Kobe J. Med. Sci. 2024, 70, E77–E80. [Google Scholar]
  53. Ngai, H.Y.; Salih, H.Q.; Albeer, A.; Aghaways, I.; Buchholz, N. Double-J ureteric stenting in pregnancy: A single-centre experience from Iraq. Arab. J. Urol. 2013, 11, 148–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Di Bello, F.; Califano, G.; Morra, S.; Ruvolo, C.C.; Fraia, A.; Pezone, G.; Di Mauro, E.; Aprea, S.; Napolitano, L.; Saccone, G.; et al. Urological Challenges during Pregnancy: Current Status and Future Perspective on Ureteric Stent Encrustation. J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13, 3905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Radu, V.D.; Vasilache, I.A.; Costache, R.C.; Scripcariu, I.S.; Nemescu, D.; Carauleanu, A.; Nechifor, V.; Groza, V.; Onofrei, P.; Boiculese, L.; et al. Pregnancy Outcomes in a Cohort of Patients Who Underwent Double-J Ureteric Stenting-A Single Center Experience. Medicina 2022, 58, 619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Farshi, A.R.; Roshandel, M.R. Intracardiac migration of ureteral double-J stent: A case report and review. Can. Urol. Assoc. J. 2015, 9, E661–E664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Radu, V.D.; Ristescu, C.; Tomac, I.; Radu, R.; Onofrei, P.; Costache, R.C. Does long preoperative ureteral Double J stenting influence the outcomes of retrograde ureteroscopy for ureteral stones? A matched-paired case-control study. Med. Surg. J. 2021, 125, 274–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Chen, S.J.; Huang, C.P.; Chiu, K.Y.; Chen, H.Y.; Lu-Ting, C.; Chen, Y.H.; Chen, W.C. Association of acute pyelonephritis with double-J ureteral stenting: A nationwide population-based case control study. Scand. J. Urol. 2021, 55, 61–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Schröder, C.; Calite, E.; Böckenhoff, P.; Büttner, T.; Stein, J.; Gembruch, U.; Strizek, B. Psoas abscess in pregnancy: A review of the literature and suggestion of minimally invasive treatment options. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2024, 309, 987–992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Haghpanah, A.; Kamran, H.; Irani, D.; Kohansal, E.; Rahmanian, M.; Defidio, L.; Dehghani, A.; Jahanabadi, Z.; Askarpour, M.R. Has the COVID-19 pandemic affected ureteral stone management in pregnant women? A retrospective single-center study. Urologia 2024, 91, 543–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Oh, S.J.; Ku, J.H.; Byun, S.S.; Lee, S.W.; Jeon, H.G.; Kim, H.H. Systemic chemotherapy in patients with indwelling ureteral stenting. Int. J. Urol. 2005, 12, 548–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Anton, G.I.; Gheorghe, L.; Radu, V.D.; Scripcariu, I.S.; Vasilache, I.A.; Carauleanu, A.; Condriuc, I.S.; Socolov, R.; Onofrei, P.; Pruteanu, A.I.; et al. Multidrug-Resistant Urinary Tract Infections in Pregnant Patients and Their Association with Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes-A Retrospective Study. J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13, 6664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Wang, Z.; Xu, L.; Su, Z.; Yao, C.; Chen, Z. Invasive management of proximal ureteral calculi during pregnancy. Urology 2014, 83, 745–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Guha, P.; Lewis, G.K.; Heckman, M.G.; Siddiqui, H.; Chen, A.H. Use of prophylactic ureteral stents in gynecologic surgery. Minerva Obstet. Gynecol. 2024, 76, 353–360. [Google Scholar]
  65. Miyauchi, Y.; Osaki, Y.; Naito, H.; Tsunemori, H.; Itoh, M.; Kanenishi, K.; Norikane, T.; Sanomura, T.; Nishiyama, Y.; Sugimoto, M. Ureteroiliac artery fistula caused by full-length metallic ureteral stenting in a malignant ureteral obstruction: A case report. J. Med. Case Rep. 2020, 14, 195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Abou Chakra, M.; Azoulai, D.; Peyromaure, M.; Barry Delongchamps, N.; Bailly, H.; Lucas, A.; Dautry, R.; Duquesne, I. A Challenging Case of Ureteroiliac Artery Fistula Managed With an Endovascular Approach. Vasc. Endovascular Surg. 2022, 2022, 15385744221105817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Leone, L.; Scarcella, S.; Dell'Atti, L.; Tiroli, M.; Sternardi, F.; Galosi, A.B. Uretero-iliac artery fistula: A challenge diagnosis for a life-threatening condition: Monocentric experience and review of the literature. Int. Urol. Nephrol. 2019, 51, 789–793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Hernandez, N.; Desroches, B.; Peden, E.; Satkunasivam, R. Uretero-Iliac artery fistula: A rare cause of haematuria. BMJ Case Rep. 2020, 13, e232189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Ando, S.; Hattori, K.; Endo, T.; Inai, H.; Matsueda, K.; Imazuru, T.; Sakakibara, Y.; Kawai, K.; Shimazui, T.; Akaza, H. Bilateral uretero-common iliac arterial fistula with long term uretelal stent: A case report. Nihon Hinyokika Gakkai Zasshi 2006, 97, 752–756. [Google Scholar]
  70. Krambeck, A.E.; DiMarco, D.S.; Gettman, M.T.; Segura, J.W. Ureteroiliac artery fistula: Diagnosis and treatment algorithm. Urology 2005, 66, 990–994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. van Ooijen, P.; ter Haar, J.F.; Pijnenborg, J.M. Extensive cellulitis as the first symptom of ureter lesion after laparoscopic hysterectomy. J. Laparoendosc. Adv. Surg. Tech. A 2011, 21, 249–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Rodrigues, J.H.G.; Tuckumantel, M.S.; Spessoto, L.C.F.; Facio, F.N., Jr. Accidental insertion of double-J in the inferior vena cava in a patient with retroperitoneal fibrosis: A case report. AME Case Rep. 2023, 7, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Zhang, S.; Liu, G.; Duo, Y.; Wang, J.; Li, J.; Li, C. Application of Ureteroscope in Emergency Treatment with Persistent Renal Colic Patients during Pregnancy. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0146597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Radu, V.D.; Vicoveanu, P.; Cărăuleanu, A.; Adam, A.M.; Melinte-Popescu, A.S.; Adam, G.; Onofrei, P.; Socolov, D.; Vasilache, I.A.; Harabor, A.; et al. Pregnancy Outcomes in Patients with Urosepsis and Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infections-A Retrospective Study. Medicina 2023, 59, 2129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Indications of double-J stents in obstetrics and gynecology.
Table 1. Indications of double-J stents in obstetrics and gynecology.
Utilization of double-J stents in obstetricsA. Gestational hydronephrosis and ureteral stone obstruction in pregnancygestational hydronephrosis
ureteral stone obstruction in pregnancy
obstructive pyelonephritis in pregnancy
B. Placenta accreta spectrumprotection of the ureters before cesarean sections in placenta percreta
resolution of some ureteral injuries during cesarean section or haemostatic hysterectomy in patients with placenta percreta
intraoperatively, to protect the ureter, during hysterectomy operations, for accidental bladder injuries, in patients with placenta percreta
Utilization of double-J stents in gynecologyin pelvic genital neoplasia, especially in advanced uterine neoplasia, with secondary ureterohydronephrosis
patients with retroperitoneal fibrosis and secondary ureterohydronephrosis after radiotherapy for pelvic genital neoplasia
preoperatively, before radical hysterectomy for pelvic genital neoplasms or endometriosis
intraoperatively, in ureteral lesions or in hysterectomy operations for genital neoplasia or other benign pathologies
Table 2. Complications associated with double-J stents in obstetrics and gynecology.
Table 2. Complications associated with double-J stents in obstetrics and gynecology.
1.Calcifications of double-J stents
2.Urinary tract infections, reflux pyelonephritis, urosepsis
3.Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTSs), gross hematuria
4.Ureteroiliac fistula
5.Misplacement, migration, or clogging of the double-J stent
6.The impossibility of inserting the double-J stent or incorrect insertion
7.Complications in birth outcomes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Radu, V.-D.; Costache, R.C.; Onofrei, P.; Banov, P.; Al Jaafari, F.; Vasilache, I.-A.; Socolov, D.; Radu, R. Double-J Ureteral Stenting in Obstetrics and Gynecology: Pivotal or Problematic? J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13, 7649. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13247649

AMA Style

Radu V-D, Costache RC, Onofrei P, Banov P, Al Jaafari F, Vasilache I-A, Socolov D, Radu R. Double-J Ureteral Stenting in Obstetrics and Gynecology: Pivotal or Problematic? Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2024; 13(24):7649. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13247649

Chicago/Turabian Style

Radu, Viorel-Dragos, Radu Cristian Costache, Pavel Onofrei, Pavel Banov, Feras Al Jaafari, Ingrid-Andrada Vasilache, Demetra Socolov, and Rodica Radu. 2024. "Double-J Ureteral Stenting in Obstetrics and Gynecology: Pivotal or Problematic?" Journal of Clinical Medicine 13, no. 24: 7649. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13247649

APA Style

Radu, V. -D., Costache, R. C., Onofrei, P., Banov, P., Al Jaafari, F., Vasilache, I. -A., Socolov, D., & Radu, R. (2024). Double-J Ureteral Stenting in Obstetrics and Gynecology: Pivotal or Problematic? Journal of Clinical Medicine, 13(24), 7649. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13247649

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop