Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Background:

Although paediatric ureteroscopy is widely performed, there is still a lack of data and outcomes in early childhood. In this two-centre study, we compared the outcomes of ureteroscopy for stone disease management in early and late childhood and provide outcomes for the same.

Methods:

Data was retrospectively collected on consecutive patients from two tertiary paediatric endo-urology European centres over a 15-year period (2006–2021). Patients were split into two groups, namely, early childhood (age ⩽ 9 years) and late childhood (age 9 to ⩽16 years). Outcomes including stone-free rate (SFR) and complications were compared between these two groups.

Results:

A total of 148 patients underwent 184 procedures (1.2 procedure/patient) during the study period (66 in early childhood and 82 in late childhood). The mean age in early and late childhood groups were 5.6 and 13.3 years, and a male: female ratio of 1.6:1 and 1.1:1, respectively. The SFR and complications in early and late childhood groups were 87.8% and 90.2% (p = 0.64) and 5.7% and 4.1%, respectively.

Conclusion:

Paediatric ureteroscopy and laser stone fragmentation achieves good results in both early and late childhood with comparable SFRs, although the complications and need for second procedure were marginally higher in the early childhood group. Our study would set up a new benchmark for patient counselling in future, and perhaps this needs to be reflected in the paediatric urolithiasis guidelines.

Keywords

kidney calculi laser paediatric stent ureteroscopy urolithiasis

Introduction

The first reported case of ureteroscopic treatment for stone disease in a paediatric case was in the year 1988 by Ritchey et al.¹ Since then, over the last three decades, there have been multiple enhancements in the field of paediatric urology with more specialised surgeons operating in medium- and high-volume centres, improved technology for surgical equipment, increased awareness and timely recognition of possible complications enabling early intervention, to name a few.^2–4 However, there is still a lack of data for paediatric ureteroscopy for kidney stone disease (KSD), and there is continued evolution of the technique with focus on treatment effectiveness and complications, especially with regard to younger children.

In their study regarding neurological development, Le et al.² defined late childhood as those beyond 9 years of age with substantial brain maturation happening towards adulthood. The Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)³ describe 9–11 years as latter part of middle childhood and describe teenage years as beginning from 12 years onwards. There is also an anatomical difference between urethra and ureteral diameter and incidence of anatomical abnormalities; we therefore used 9 years as hallmark for our study with adolescence-related physiological and physical changes occurring with progression of age in this cohort. The changes being in the form of growth spurts, fat deposition, muscular hypertrophy, and hormonal pathway activation and maturation.

Paediatric ureteroscopy is specialised due to the minimisation of equipment, anaesthetic challenges, and developmental and anatomic abnormalities which are common in children with kidney stones.^5–11 The outcome of intervention is variable between centres based on their experience, expertise and choice of chosen intervention. In a study of 54 patients, Gedik et al.⁵ achieved a stone-free rate (SFR) of 77.8% in population age range of 1–16 years and Kim et al.⁶ demonstrated a SFR of 98.5% in 170 patients with age ranging from 0.2 to 18.1 years in their study. This indicates the variation in outcomes with similar interventions in different centres and differing patient population.

In this two-centre study, we compared the outcomes of ureteroscopy for stone disease management in early and late childhood to contribute to progression of surgical management and provide data for safety and efficacy for the same. We hypothesise that the role of ureteroscopy and laser stone fragmentation (URSL) is safe and effective across all age groups of paediatric patients.

Materials and methods

Data was collected on consecutive patients from two tertiary paediatric endo-urology European centres [University Hospital Southampton (UHS), United Kingdom, and Fundació Puigvert (FP), Barcelona, Spain] operating independently of each other. The study was registered as an audit with UHS audit committee (audit number 6901) and was approved by the FP Hospital Ethics Committee, and retrospective data was collected from both centres. A valid written informed consent was obtained from all the patients/parents/legal guardians for their data to be utilised in this study. This was further analysed using electronic health records and cross-checked with patient correspondence and discharge summary. The operating teams were trained in paediatric ureteroscopy, with medical and surgical expertise in order to provide best possible patient care.

Collection of data was spread over a period of 15 years from June 2006 to January 2021, and a total of 184 ureteroscopies were performed in 148 patients. Patients were divided into two groups, namely, early childhood (age ⩽ 9 years) and late childhood (age 9 to ⩽16 years).^2,3 Data regarding patient age, sex, initial presentation, mode of initial investigation, co-existing anatomical and metabolic anomalies, date of surgery, pre- and post-operative stenting, operative duration, access sheath use, intra-operative complications, post-operative complications (within 30 days), SFR, re-intervention and follow-up imaging were recorded.

Procedural details have previously been extensively detailed and discussed.^7–9 Stone diagnosis was established by ultrasound scan or plain KUB XR and during follow-up, a renal USS (Ultrasound Scan) was done to confirm the stone-free status. A multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussed all cases. SFR was defined as endoscopically stone free and radiologically stone free (defined as fragments < 2 mm) at follow-up, 2 to 4 months post-procedure. During the procedure, a 4.5 F (Richard Wolf, USA) semirigid and 7.5 F Flex X2 fURS (Karl Storz Endoscopy Ltd., UK) was used, with a Holmium: YAG laser (100, 60 or 20 W Lumenis, USA) for fragmentation using a 272-lm laser fibre (Lumenis, Inc.). The use of intra-operative access sheath and post-procedural stent was surgeon-dependent, and a stone fragment was extracted and sent for crystallographic analyses.

The data was anonymised and analysed using excel (Microsoft, USA) and SPSS (IBM^® SPSS^® version 27). Chi-square test was used in SPSS to obtain the statistical significance in the form of p value and excel was used to obtain medians, standard deviation, range and percentage. A p value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

A total of 148 patients underwent 184 procedures (1.2 procedure/patient) during the study period (Table 1), with 66 patients in early childhood group and 82 patients in late childhood group. The mean age in early and late childhood groups were 5.6 and 13.3 years, and a male: female ratio of 1.6:1 and 1.1:1, respectively. The median stone size in both groups was 9.0 mm. The clinical presentations in early and late childhood groups were with pain (40.9% versus 70.7%), infection (19.6% versus 12.1%), haematuria (24.2% versus 21.9%) and acute kidney injury (0% versus 1.2%), with some having multiple symptoms, and 51.5% versus 24.3% being asymptomatic in the two groups, respectively.

Table 1.

Pre-operative demographics of patients undergoing URSL procedure for both groups.

Demographics	Early childhood (⩽9 years)	Late childhood (9 to ⩽16 years)
Number of patients	66	82
Number of procedures	87	97
Procedure/patient	1.2	1.1
Median age ± SD(range)	6 ± 2.23(0.8–9 years)	14 ± 1.98(9.1 to ⩽16 years)
Male: female	1.6:1	1.1:1
Incidence of metabolic anomalies	28 (38.3%)	29 (32.9%)
Incidence of anatomical anomalies	17 (23.2%)	14 (15.9%)
Median stone size ± SD(range) in mm	9.0 ± 4.6 (3–30)	9.0 ± 6.87 (3–60)
Stone location – Ureteric: renal (multiple stones)	1:1.1 (28)	1:1.5 (37)
Renal pelvis	23	23
Upper renal pole	9	18
Middle renal pole	15	15
Lower renal pole	31	39
Proximal ureter/PUJ	3	8
Mid-ureter	3	3
Distal ureter/VUJ	23	23
Inter-diverticular	0	1
NOS	10	4

NOS, not otherwise specified; PUJ, pelvi-ureteric junction; SD, standard deviation; URSL, ureteroscopy and laser stone fragmentation; VUJ, vesico-ureteric junction.

The mean operative duration for early and late childhood was 86.2 and 82.4 min, respectively. There was no significant difference in pre- or post-operative stent rates in early and late childhood groups (42% and 51.5%, p = 0.25; and 43.1% and 45.3%, p = 0.63). Ureteric access sheath (UAS) was used 21.5% and 24.7% in early and late childhood, respectively (p = 0.46). The SFRs in early and late childhood were 87.8% and 90.2%, respectively (p = 0.64) (Table 2). The most common stone composition was calcium oxalate in both the groups. Intra-operative minor ureteric mucosal injury was seen in three patients in early childhood and one patient in late childhood, respectively, which was managed with ureteric stent insertions. Post-operative complications were noted in 5.7% and 4.1% in early and late childhood, respectively (Table 2). These were all Clavien I/II complications except one Clavien IV complication in early childhood who had a post-op sepsis with brief intensive care admission (Table 2).

Table 2.

Post-operative outcomes of patients of both age groups undergoing URSL.

Demographics	Early childhood (⩽9 years)	Late childhood (9 to ⩽16 years)	p value
UAS use	19 (21.5%)	24 (24.7%)	0.46
Pre-operative stent	37/88 (42%)	50/97 (51.5%)	0.25
Post-operative stent	38/88 (43.1%)	44/97 (45.3%)	0.63
Stone-free rate	87.87%	90.24%	0.64
Complications
Intra-operative
Overall intra-operative complications	4/87 (4.5%)	2/97 (2.0%)	0. 903
Ureteric injury (stent inserted)	3	1	0.267
Intra-operative bleeding causing rescheduling of procedure	0	1	0.176
Post-operative
Overall post-operative complications	5/87 (5.7%)	4/97 (4.1%)	0.296
Haematuria	1	0	0.292
Fever	1	1	0.945
Post-operative sepsis	1	2	0.619
Urine retention requiring catheterization	2	1	0.504

UAS, ureteric access sheath; URSL, ureteroscopy and laser stone fragmentation.

Discussion

This study demonstrates the safety of performing URS for renal stone disease across all paediatric age groups with our SFR comparable with previously published data^5–13 and an overall post-operative complication rate of 7% across all age groups. All the ureteric injuries (1.6%) were of grade 1 classification and were managed conservatively with stent insertion.

Ureteroscopy seems to have evolved itself as the most favoured treatment strategy balancing the clinical efficacy with safety perhaps in contrast to shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), respectively.^7–14 With the advancement in technology providing smaller size equipment for URS and more surgeons trained in paediatric endo-urology operating in high-volume centres, it is emerging as a frontline alternative. Our study used fragmentation and stone dusting for treatment and reflects a SFR of 87.8% in early childhood and 90.2% in late childhood with minimal associated morbidity. Rob et al.¹² in their systematic review found an overall SFR of 90.4% ranging from 58% to 100% from studies from medium- to high-volume centre. The overall complication rate in this study¹² was recorded at 11.1% with 69% and 31% as Clavien Dindo (CD) 1 and CD 2–3, respectively. Other series and systematic reviews have also commonly commented on CD complication of ⩽ 3 for paediatric URSL.^12–17

The European Association of Urology (EAU) urolithiasis guidelines¹⁸ includes all the three modalities (SWL, URS and PCNL) for active intervention of renal stone disease, with SWL and fURS offering a SFR of 70–90% and 76–100%, respectively. SWL is the first choice of treatment for paediatric stone disease though it often requires sedation or general anaesthetic in this population for patient positioning and tolerability of the procedure. It is often associated with renal colic, steinstrasse, sepsis and transient hydronephrosis, and may not always be successful. In their follow-up post SWL versus URS, Tejwani et al.¹⁹ found that patients receiving SWL for stone treatment required more additional procedures to be rendered stone free as compared with the URS cohort. PCNL is an alternative option for stones > 2 cm and complex renal stones. With the advent of micro-PCNL, the morbidity associated with PCNL has reduced. Post-operative bleeding and organ injury are the most dreaded complication with PCNL, with Bhageria et al.²⁰ reporting a transfusion rate of 9%. Other complications associated with PCNL are fever, sepsis, hydrothorax, pneumothorax and perinephric collection.

In their paediatric patient cohort of 11 patients, Utang˘aç et al.²¹ had a SFR of 100% with no intra-operative complications and one episode of self-resolving post-operative haematuria. In a larger patient cohort of 100 patients analysed retrospectively, Smaldone et al.²² achieved a SFR of 91% with one patient requiring ureteral re-implantation due to ureteric stricture formation on follow-up. In a study of 30 paediatric patients treated for KSD, Ferretti et al.²³ found an overall SFR of 93.3% when including re-intervention and a low rate of major complications. Similarly, Nerli et al.²⁴ in their study of 77 patients less than 60 months of age while suggesting URS as first line of treatment for paediatric urolithiasis found a SFR of 94.8% with an overall complication rate of 12.9%.

A systematic review by Pietropaolo et al.²⁵ found a rising trend in active surgical intervention utilising URS and PCNL for paediatric urolithiasis as witnessed by improving outcomes. We can see the progress in URS since 1997, when al Busaidy et al.²⁶ reported on 50 ureteroscopies in paediatric cases with 8.5, 9.5 and 11.5 Fr ureteroscopes and recorded two episodes of ureteric perforation with three failed procedures requiring utero-lithotomy. In practice, today with equipment downsizing to 4.5 Fr ureteroscopes available for paediatric cases if any resistance is encountered, a patient can be stented and scheduled for another definitive future procedure to avoid any untoward trauma. UAS is also helpful in gaining access to ureter and kidneys in cases where the operating surgeon deems it fit to attempt usage. In their twin-surgeon model, Somani and Griffin²⁷ have described the advantage of having two surgeons and the involvement of an MDT to improve URS outcomes.

With easy access to miniaturised instrument, courses for training and newer lasertripsy methods like ‘pop-dusting’,²⁸ URS can be safely used in paediatric cases in appropriately equipped centres where staff are well trained to aide early recognition of intra- and post-operative complications. With advent in technology, cost-effectiveness and more research available on URS, improved outcomes can be expected and perhaps equivocal findings when compared with adult population.²⁹ In the management of upper urinary tract stones in children, Freton et al.³⁰ showed that fURS provided a higher single-session SFR compared with SWL, despite having more complex urinary stones, without increasing the morbidity. With the advent of smaller ureteroscopes, high powered laser and digital technology, fURS seem to be pushing the boundary in treating larger renal stones using ‘dusting and pop-dusting’ technique.²⁸

Our article is based on retrospective data, and due to small number of patients, it was not possible to perform a multivariate analysis, but this has been a consecutive series of patients with data collected and analysed by neutral third party not involved in the original study. However, failure to access during the primary URS procedure was not uniformly captured, which has been shown to be higher for the early age group patients.³¹ It is the largest observational study comparing outcomes of URSL in early and late childhood. This will set an important benchmark in counselling patients although studies should also look at standardising outcome measures such as SFR and looking at cost and quality of life of patients. The future paediatric urolithiasis guidelines should factor in patient age for recommendations of any surgical treatment, as the choice of treatment and outcomes could be influenced by the age. Based on our results, perhaps ureteroscopy could become a first-line treatment for paediatric urolithiasis in the late childhood.

Conclusion

Paediatric URSL achieves good results in both early and late childhood with comparable SFRs, although the complications and need for second procedure were marginally higher in the early childhood group. Our study would set up new benchmark for patient counselling in future, and perhaps this needs to be reflected in the paediatric urolithiasis guidelines. Future prospective randomised studies are needed to corroborate our results.

Footnotes

None.

Declarations

ORCID iDs

Mriganka Sinha

Amelia Pietropaolo

Bhaskar K Somani

References

Ritchey

Patterson

Kelalis

, et al. A case of pediatric ureteroscopic lasertripsy. J Urol 1988; 139: 1272–1274.

Huang

O’Rawe

, et al. Functional neural network configuration in late childhood varies by age and cognitive state. Dev Cogn Neurosci 2020; 4545: 100862.

Middle childhood (9–11 years of age), https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/childdevelopment/positiveparenting/middle2.html (accessed 23 March 2022).

Miah

Kamat

Pediatric nephrolithiasis: a review. Pediatr Ann 2017; 46: e242–e244.

Gedik

Orgen

Akay

, et al. Semi-rigid ureterorenoscopy in children without ureteral dilatation. Int Urol Nephrol 2008; 4040: 1111–1144.

Kim

Kolon

Canter

, et al. Pediatric Flexible Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy: The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia Experience. J Urol 2008; 180: 2616–2619; discussion 2619.

Mosquera

Pietropaolo

Brewin

, et al. Safety and outcomes of using ureteric access sheaths (UAS) for treatment of paediatric renal stones: outcomes from 2 tertiary endourology centres. Urology 2021; 157: 222–226.

Mosquera

Pietropaolo

Madarriaga

, et al. Is flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy the new gold standard for paediatric lower pole stones? Outcomes from two large European endourology centres. J Endourol 2021; 35: 1479–1482.

Jones

Rob

Griffin

, et al. Outcomes of ureteroscopy (URS) for stone disease in the paediatric population: results of over 100 URS procedures from a UK tertiary centre. WJU 2020; 38: 213–218.

10.

Schuster

Russell

Bloom

, et al. Ureteroscopy for the treatment of urolithiasis in children. J Urol 2002; 167: 1813; discussion 1815–1816.

11.

Tan

AHH

Al-Omar

Denstedt

, et al. Ureteroscopy for pediatric urolithiasis: an evolving first-line therapy. Urology 2005; 65: 153–156.

12.

Rob

Jones

Pietropaolo

, et al. Ureteroscopy for stone disease in paediatric population is safe and effective in medium-volume and high-volume centres: evidence from a systematic review. Curr Urol Rep 2017; 18: 92.

13.

Xiao

Wang

, et al. Treatment of upper urinary tract stones with flexible ureteroscopy in children. Can Urol Assoc J 2019; 13: E78–E82.

14.

Rizvi

Sultan

Zafar

, et al. Paediatric urolithiasis in emerging economies. Int J Surg 2016; 36: 705–712.

15.

Halinski

Zaniew

, et al. Interest of URS-L in the treatment of ureterolithiasis in preschool children. Front Pediatr 2019; 77: 324.

16.

Ishii

Griffin

Somani

BK.

Flexible ureteroscopy and lasertripsy (FURSL) for paediatric renal calculi: results from a systematic review. J Pediatr Urol 2014; 10: 1020–1025.

17.

Whatley

Jones

Aboumarzouk

, et al. Safety and efficacy of ureteroscopy and stone fragmentation for pediatric renal stones: a systematic review. Transl Androl Urol 2019; 8: S442–S447.

18.

Turk

Neisius

Petrik

, et al. EAU guidelines on urolithiasis 2021, https://uroweb.org/wp-content/uploads/EAU-Guidelines-on-Urolithiasis-2021-V2-1.pdf (accessed 2 February 2022).

19.

Tejwani

Wang

Wolf

, et al. Outcomes of shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for treatment of pediatric urolithiasis. J Urol 2016; 196196: 196196–201201.

20.

Bhageria

Nayak

Seth

, et al. Paediatric percutaneous nephrolithotomy: single-centre 10-year experience. J Pediatr Urol 2013; 9: 472–475.

21.

Utang˘aç

M M

Dag˘gülli

Dede

, et al. Effectiveness of ureteroscopy among the youngest patients: one centre’s experience in an endemic region in Turkey. J Pediatr Urol 2017; 13: 37e1–37.

22.

Smaldone

Cannon

Jr Wu

, et al. Is ureteroscopy first line treatment for pediatric stone disease? J Urol 2007; 178: 2128–2131; discussion 2131.

23.

Ferretti

Cuschera

Campobasso

, et al. Rigid and flexible ureteroscopy (URS/RIRS) management of paediatric urolithiasis in a not endemic country. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2021; 93: 26–30.

24.

Nerli

Sharma

Gupta

, et al. Therapeutic ureteroscopy for urolithiasis in children younger than 60 months of age. Pediatr Surg Int 2021; 37: 145–150.

25.

Pietropaolo

Proietti

Jones

, et al. Trends of intervention for paediatric stone disease over the last two decades (2000–2015): a systematic review of literature. Arab J Urol 2017; 15: 306–311.

26.

al Busaidy

Prem

Medhat

Paediatric ureteroscopy for ureteric calculi: a 4-year experience. Br J Urol 1997; 80: 797–801.

27.

Somani

Griffin

Ureteroscopy for paediatric calculi: the twin-surgeon model. J Pediatr Urol 2018; 14: 73–74.

28.

Pietropaolo

Jones

Whitehurst

, et al. Role of ‘dusting and pop-dusting’ using a high powered (100W) laser machine in the treatment of large stones (15mm): prospective outcomes over 16 months. Urolithiasis 2019; 177: 1793–1798.

29.

Geraghty

Jones

Herrmann

TRW

, et al. Ureteroscopy is more cost effective than shockwave lithotripsy for stone treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis. WJU 2018; 36: 1783–1793.

30.

Freton

Peyronnet

Arnaud

, et al. Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy versus flexible ureteroscopy for the management of upper urinary tract stones in children. J Endo 2017; 31: 1–6.

31.

Ishii

Griffin

Somani

BK.

Ureteroscopy for stone disease in the paediatric population: a systematic review. BJUI 2015; 115: 867–873.

Outcomes of ureteroscopy for management of stone disease in early and late childhood over a 15-year period

Abstract

Background:

Methods:

Results:

Conclusion:

Keywords

Introduction

Materials and methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

Footnotes

Declarations

ORCID iDs

References