CClinicalTrials.gg
Status unknownNCT03257306MAGUSSUpdated Oct 8, 2021

Magnetic Ureteral Stent Symptoms - a Comparison to Standard Ureteral Stent as Perceived By the Patient (MAGUSS)

An interventional study of ureteral double-J stent removal using magnet and ureteral double-J stent removal using cystoscopy in Urinary Tract Stone and Kidney Stone, sponsored by Turku University Hospital. Status unknown at 3 sites in Finland. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 85 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2021-10-08.

Sponsored by Turku University Hospital · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

The sponsor has not verified this record recently (last verified Oct 2021), so the status shown — last known as Recruiting — may be out of date.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
170
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 85 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The specific aim of this study is to validate our hypothesis that the magnetic ureteral stents have the same amount of adverse effects as the more commonly used non-magnetic ureteral stents. If this hypothesis would be confirmed then the usage of magnetic ureteral stents would be justified for both reducing patient discomfort by way of fewer cystoscopies and possibly also decreasing the overall expenditures of treatment.

Read the detailed description

Many urological procedures involving the kidney and the ureters require a stent replacement to avoid un-wanted adverse invents caused by the procedure itself. The stenting, however, predisposes the patient to adverse effects of its own and the application and removal of the stent is a notable monetary expense. The use of magnetic ureteral stents that can be removed via catheter instead of requiring an additional cystoscopy for removal would reduce the discomfort to patients and also possibly decrease the expenditures of the overall treatment. However, the comparability of standard ureteral stents and the magnetic ureteral stents is largely unknown due to there being no published research on the subject as of this time. The specific aim of this study is to validate our hypothesis that the magnetic ureteral stents have the same amount of adverse effects as the more commonly used non-magnetic ureteral stents.

The design is as prospective randomized, single-blinded, multi-institutional, non-inferiority study conducted in Hospital Districts of Southwest Finland, Päijät-Häme, Pohjois-Savo, Satakunta and Keski-Suomi. Using age and gender stratification, patients are randomised 1:1 fashion into having a magnetic (n=85) or standard ureter stent (n=85). The primary objectives are the mean differences between the two groups in pain and urinary symptoms scores determined by the Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire (USSQ) 4 weeks after stent placement.

The patients will be recruited starting from the 4rd quarter of 2018 and ending during the 3rd quarter of 2020. Preliminary analysis of all results will be available in September 2020 and reports are expected to be written during December 2020.

02

Conditions studied

  • Urinary Tract Stone
  • Kidney Stone

Keywords

  • Urinary tract stone
  • ureter double-J stent
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 85 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Language spoken: Finnish
  • Clinically evaluated need for short term ureter stenting in course of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy-treatment or after pyeloscopy
  • Mental status: Patients must be able to understand the meaning of the study
  • Informed consent: The patient must sign the appropriate Ethics Committee (EC) approved informed consent documents in the presence of the designated staff

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Current use of alpha blockers
  • Patients undergoing emergency ureteroscopy and stenting
  • Patients with a long term ureter stents
  • Any other conditions that might compromise patients safety, based on the clinical judgment of the responsible urologist
04

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
170 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Magnetic double-J ureteric stent

    Double-J ureteric stent removed using magnet

    Procedure: ureteral double-J stent removal using magnet · Procedure: ureteral double-J stent removal using cystoscopy

  • Active comparator
    Standard double-J ureteric stent

    Double-J stent removed using cystoscopy

    Procedure: ureteral double-J stent removal using magnet · Procedure: ureteral double-J stent removal using cystoscopy

Interventions

  • Procedureureteral double-J stent removal using magnet

    Double-J ureteric stent removed using magnet

  • Procedureureteral double-J stent removal using cystoscopy

    Double-J ureteric stent removed using cystoscopy

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Change in Pain score in Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire (USSQ)

    4 weeks after stent placement. \[5\] Less than 5 points of difference between the two study groups is considered as clinically insignificant.

    Time frame: 4 weeks after stent placement and 4 weeks after stent removal

Secondary outcomes

  1. General health score in Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire (USSQ)

    4 weeks after stent placement. Scores less than 4 points of difference between the two study groups is considered as clinically insignificant.

    Time frame: 4 weeks after stent placement and 4 weeks after stent removal

  2. Sexual score in Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire (USSQ)

    4 weeks after stent placement. Scores less than 4 points of difference between the two study groups is considered as clinically insignificant.

    Time frame: 4 weeks after stent placement and 4 weeks after stent removal

  3. Working performance score in Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire (USSQ)

    4 weeks after stent placement. Scores less than 4 points of difference between the two study groups is considered as clinically insignificant.

    Time frame: 4 weeks after stent placement and 4 weeks after stent removal

  4. Urinary symptom score in Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire (USSQ)

    4 weeks after stent placement. Scores less than 4 points of difference between the two study groups is considered as clinically insignificant.

    Time frame: 4 weeks after stent placement and 4 weeks after stent removal

Other outcomes

  1. The discomfort experienced by the patients during stent removal determined in 100mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS).

    More than 10mm difference between the two groups is considered as clinically significant.

    Time frame: 4 weeks after stent placement

  2. The number of unsuccessful removals of the magnetic stent.

    Unsuccessful removal using magnet

    Time frame: 4 weeks after stent placement

06

Study locations

3 of 3 sites recruiting
  • Keski-Suomi Central Hospital
    Jyväskylä, Finland
    Recruiting
  • Satakunta Central Hospital
    Pori, Finland
    Recruiting
  • Turku University Hospital
    Turku, 20521, Finland
    Recruiting
07

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03257306
Lead sponsor
Turku University Hospital
Collaborators
Kuopio University Hospital, Satakunta Central Hospital, Jyväskylä Central Hospital
Responsible party
Kari Syvanen (Principal Investigator, Turku University Hospital) — Principal investigator
First posted
Aug 22, 2017
Start date
Nov 9, 2018
Primary completion
Dec 2022 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 2022 (estimated)
Last update
Oct 8, 2021

Study contacts

Kari T Syvänen, MD, PhD
Contact
kari.syvanen@tyks.fi
+3582313000
Otto Ettala, MD, PhD
Contact
otto.ettala@tyks.fi
+3582313000
Kari T Syvänen, MD, PhD
principal investigator · Turku University Hospital

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is status unknown, as verified in Oct 2021. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion