Ureteral stents have been utilized for decades in maintaining ureteral patency, most commonly after ureteroscopy in the treatment of urolithiasis. Since their initial development, ureteral stents have had many technological advances that have allowed for better patient outcomes with improvements in comfort, durability, patency, encrustation resistance, biocompatibility, ease of insertion, migration, and biofilm development. Several new ureteral stents enter the market every year, each with their own touted benefits. It is essential to understand the different advantages for each ureteral stent to provide the best available care to patients when possible. The purpose of this review is to give a brief history of ureteral stent development and summarize the recent developments in ureteral stent designs. We aim to review the data supporting the clinical advantages of the latest ureteral stents available for use by urologists.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Patients with obstructive pyelonephritis (OPN) require urgent decompression via retrograde ureteral stenting (RUS) or percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN). In 2016, the urology and interventional radiology departments at our institution established a protocol for patients with OPN with sepsis. The primary objectives were to assess this protocol's impact on improving time to decompression and whether more expedient decompression decreased length of stay (LOS). Secondarily, we assessed the impact of the protocol and clinical factors on receipt of PCN over RUS. METHODS 147 patients at our institution who underwent PCN from 2012 – 2017 or stent from 2014 - 2017 for stone-related OPN meeting sepsis criteria were retrospectively reviewed. Univariate descriptive statistics compared patient characteristics and outcomes between RUS and PCN pre- and post-protocol implementation. Multivariable logistic regression assessed predictors of decompression with PCN (vs RUS) and of prolonged LOS (>5 days). RESULTS Utilization of PCN increased after implementation of the protocol from 4 PCN/yr to 14 PCN/yr with a decrease in the median time from urologic consultation to PCN from 9.2 hours to 4.3 hours (p = 0.001) with overall median time to decompression decreasing from 5.4 to 4.5 hours (p = 0.017). Predictors of undergoing PCN (vs RUS) included increasing comorbidity and ≥1cm obstructing stone. On multivariable analysis controlling for comorbidity, leukocytosis, and septic shock, increasing hours to decompression increased odds of prolonged LOS (1.08, 95%CI 1.02 - 1.15, p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS After implementing our OPN with sepsis protocol, time to decompression decreased with dramatic improvement in time to PCN. Quicker decompression was independently associated with reduced odds of prolonged hospital stay. A well-designed protocol engages both urology and IR in the management of these acutely ill patients and improves outcomes.

Purpose: Malignant extrinsic ureteral obstruction (MEUO) is a challenging clinical problem. Many factors weigh into the decision to proceed with retrograde ureteral stent (RUS), nephrostomy tube (NT), or observation; however, there is no consensus for the optimal approach. The objective of this study was twofold. First, to determine practice patterns by correlating patient, hospital, and disease characteristics to manage MEUO; second, to describe treatment trends of MEUO over time. Materials and Methods: Using the National Inpatient Sample 2010–2015, we abstracted all adults with diagnoses of hydronephrosis and concurrent metastasis or lymphoma, excluding any record with a diagnosis of urinary tract stone. Multinomial regression assessed predictors of undergoing no decompression, stenting, or nephrostomy. Quarterly trends and annual percentage change of MEUO prevalence and percentage decompressed with stent vs nephrostomy were calculated. Results: There were an estimated 238,500 cases of MEUO from 2010 to 2015, of which 18.0% underwent decompression with RUS and 11.4% NT. On multinomial regression, prostate (odds ratio [OR] 1.5), bladder (1.6), cervical (1.6) cancer, academic hospitals (1.4), and acute kidney injury were among factors that most significantly increased odds of undergoing NT. Factors that significantly increased odds of undergoing RUS included colon (OR 1.4), rectal/anal (1.3), ovarian (1.2) cancer, Midwest ( vs northeast) hospitals (1.4), and female gender (1.4), whereas decreased odds of RUS were associated with bladder cancer (0.7), nonwhite race (0.8), and weekend admission (0.8). While MEUO prevalence has been increasing on an average of 2.9%/year, decompression rates have been decreasing, driven solely by a decrease in RUS of 3.8%/year on average. Conclusions: There is substantial variation in approach for MEUO among patient, hospital, and disease types, with an overall decline in stenting compared with steady nephrostomy use. Further investigation into best approaches for certain patient characteristics and disease types is needed to standardize care and reduce disparities.

Purpose of review: To understand the indications and outcomes of renal autotransplantation, and when to consider this unique procedure for patients. Recent findings: Renal autotransplantation confers acceptably low rates of graft failure and prevents need for long-term dialysis. Renal autotransplantation remains an important management strategy in very select patients for complex renovascular disease, ureteral stricture disease, ureteral trauma, upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma, renal cell carcinoma, and Loin-Pain Hematuria Syndrome. With advancements in minimally invasive procedures, the application of renal autotransplantation for refractory stone disease is rare but exists. Robot-assisted laparoscopic renal autotransplantation demonstrates reproducible graft success and complication rates with improved perioperative outcomes (ex. hospital length of stay) – though comparative studies are lacking. Patients would benefit from a multidisciplinary approach from renal transplant surgeons, vascular surgeons, urologists, nephrologists, dieticians, pain management providers, social workers, and psychiatrists. Summary: In experienced hands, renal autotransplantation is a reasonable treatment approach for complex and refractory renal vascular disease, Loin-Pain Hematuria Syndrome, ureteral strictures and trauma, upper urinary tract malignancy, and stone disease in highly select patients.