Evaluating the Clinical Impact and safety of Stentless Ureteroscopy in Urolithiasis Management

Nassar R1, Assiri J1, Alsudais M1, Alali A1, Bedaiwi A1, Alshamrani K1, Garmoush M1, Habibi M1, Almuthhin Y1, Almugharraq M1, Albogami S2, Talaq H3, Eltholoth H1, Alzahrani A1, Alruwaily A1

Research Type

Clinical

Abstract Category

Urolithiasis

Abstract 746
Open Discussion ePosters
Scientific Open Discussion Session 109
Saturday 20th September 2025
15:40 - 15:45 (ePoster Station 2)
Exhibition
Surgery Retrospective Study Outcomes Research Methods
1. Prince Sultan Military Medical City, 2. Imam Mohammed Ibn Saud ISlamic University, 3. King Faisal University
Presenter
Links

Abstract

Hypothesis / aims of study
Uretric stents have been routinely placed after URS to prevent complications. However, stents can cause significant patient discomfort and may lead to complications.

Stentless URS has emerged as a promising alternative, aiming to reduce patient morbidity without compromising clinical outcomes.

This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of stentless URS with standard URS with stent placement in the management of urolithiasis.

• To assess the outcomes of stentless ureteroscopy in treatment of urolithiasis in form of Recurrent ER visit, admission, needs for stent post procedure, AKI, UTI and clearance of stones post op by imaging (US or CT KUB)
• Comparison to conventional ureteroscopy (stent insertion post ureteroscopy) by simple matching:
1- Sex
2- Age
3- Size of stone
4- Stone location
Study design, materials and methods
A prospective case-control study was conducted at Prince Sultan Military Medical City in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Patients undergoing URS between November 2023 and February 2024 were included. Patients were matched based on age, stone location, and stone size.
The two groups were compared regarding demographic factors, stone characteristics, procedural outcome (UTI, ER Visits, Admission, and Re-Intervention within 30 days of procedure).
Results
A total of 104 patients were included in the study, with 52 patients in each group. The two groups were comparable in terms of age, gender, stone location, and comorbidities. However, the stentless group had significantly smaller maximum stone size and lower stone density. Among the patients, some retained the stone while others successfully passed it. When compared to conventional ureteroscopy, stentless URS yielded similar results in terms of effectiveness of treatment.
Interpretation of results
ER visits, and hospitalization rate are higher in Stended group, but not statistically significant (17% vs 21%).
Concluding message
Stentless URS is a safe and effective alternative to traditional URS with stent placement for the management of urolithiasis. It can be applied without compromising clinical outcomes. Further large-scale prospective trials are needed to confirm these benefits of stentless URS.
Figure 1 Parameters
Figure 2 Outcomes
Disclosures
Funding None Clinical Trial Yes Public Registry No RCT No Subjects Human Ethics Committee Prince Sultan Military Medical City Helsinki Yes Informed Consent Yes
29/07/2025 01:41:01