Lennon G M, Thornhill J A, Sweeney P A, Grainger R, McDermott T E, Butler M R
Department of Urology, Meath Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Eur Urol. 1995;28(1):1-5. doi: 10.1159/000475010.
It is generally considered that 'firm' double pigtail ureteric catheters, while easier to insert and less prone to migration, may cause more patient discomfort than the 'softer' variety of stent. Objective support for these perceptions is however lacking. The aim of this study was to compare firm and soft stents regarding their ease of insertion, positional stability, biocompatibility and patient tolerance. 155 patients were randomised to receive 'firm' (polyurethane, n = 78) or 'soft' (Sof-Flex, n = 77) stents. Ease and mode of insertion was recorded at time of initial placement. Positional stability, degree of bladder inflammation, stent encrustation and patient tolerance were recorded at the time of removal. Patient tolerance was assessed by symptom score in double-blind fashion. Results showed no significant difference in ease of insertion, positional stability, degree of bladder inflammation or stent encrustation between the two groups. There was a significantly higher incidence of dysuria, renal and suprapubic pain in the firm stent group. There was no significant difference in the incidence of urgency, frequency, nocturia or haematuria. Normal activity and return to work were reported in 67 and 45% of patients with soft and firm stents, respectively. The data indicates that patient tolerance appears to be related to the softness of the stent material.
一般认为，“硬”双猪尾输尿管导管虽然更容易插入且不太容易移位，但与“软”型支架相比，可能会给患者带来更多不适。然而，缺乏对这些观点的客观支持。本研究的目的是比较硬支架和软支架在插入难易程度、位置稳定性、生物相容性和患者耐受性方面的差异。155例患者被随机分为接受“硬”支架（聚氨酯，n = 78）或“软”支架（Sof-Flex，n = 77）。在初次放置时记录插入的难易程度和方式。在取出时记录位置稳定性、膀胱炎症程度、支架结痂情况和患者耐受性。通过双盲方式根据症状评分评估患者耐受性。结果显示，两组在插入难易程度、位置稳定性、膀胱炎症程度或支架结痂方面无显著差异。硬支架组尿痛、肾区和耻骨上区疼痛的发生率显著更高。尿急、尿频、夜尿或血尿的发生率无显著差异。分别有67%和45%使用软支架和硬支架的患者报告恢复了正常活动和重返工作岗位。数据表明，患者耐受性似乎与支架材料的柔软度有关。
