Objectives: The aim of this study was to document if stones at the lower ureter alter the micturition capability of the patients and to investigate whether endoscopic removal of these stones restores normal urinary flow rates or not in the 3 months of follow-up. Methods: Forty patients with lower ureteral stone (group 1) and 20 control subjects with proximal ureteral stone (group 2) were enrolled into the study. All patients underwent uroflowmetry testing before and 3 months after the treatment for endoscopic stone removal. The mean average and peak flow rates with a sufficient voided volume (≥150 ml) were evaluated before and after surgery and compared between the groups. Results: Mean values of the peak flow rates before and after surgery were 20.3 and 27.5 ml/s in group 1 and 22.5 and 23.6 ml/s in group 2, and the mean average flow rate values before and after surgery were 10.5 and 13.6 ml/s in group 1 and 11.4 and 12.1 ml/s in group 2. Statistically significant differences were determined between before and after ureteroscopy values were determined in terms of average (p < 0.05) and peak flow rates (p < 0.01) in group I; however, there no significant difference was seen in the control group. Conclusion: We document for the first time in the literature that patients with lower ureteric stones have a reduction in their urinary stream which resolves with endoscopic removal of the stones.

Keywords:
Uroflowmetry, Ureteric stones, Sympathetic nervous system, Low urinary tract symptoms
1.
Stamatelou KK, Francis ME, Jones CA, et al: Time trends in reported prevalence of kidney Stones in the United States: 1976-1994. Kidney Int 2003;63:1817-1823.
2.
Brown J: Diagnostic and treatment patterns for renal colic in US emergency departments. Int Urol Nephrol 2006;38:87-92.
3.
Margaret SP: Management of the acute stone event. AUA Update Series 2008;27:282-291.
4.
Morita T, Wada I, Saeki H, et al: Ureteral urine transport: changes in bolus volume, peristaltic frequency, intraluminal pressure and volume of flow resulting from autonomic drugs. J Urol 1987;137:132-135.
5.
Del Tacca M: Acetylcholine content of and release from isolated pelviureteral tract. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol 1978;302:293-297.
6.
Latifpour J, Morita T, O'Hollaren B, et al: Characterization of autonomic receptors in neonatal urinary tract smooth muscle. Dev Pharmacol Ther 1989;13:1-10.
7.
Latifpour J, Kondo S, O'Hollaren B, et al: Autonomic receptors in urinary tract: sex and age differences. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1990;253:661-667.
8.
Edyvane KA, Smet PJ, Trussell DC, et al: Patterns of neuronal colocalisation of tyrosine hydroxylase, neuropeptide Y, vasoactive intestinal polypeptide, calcitonin gene-related peptide and substance P in human ureter. J Auton Nerv Syst 1994;48:241-255.
9.
Weiss RM, Bassett AL, Hoffman BF: Adrenergic innervation of the ureter. Invest Urol 1978;16:123-127.
10.
Rivera L, Hernández M, Benedito S, et al: Mediation of contraction and relaxation by alpha- and beta-adrenoceptors in the ureterovesical junction of the sheep. Res Vet Sci 1992;52:57-61.
11.
Tomiyama Y, Hayakawa K, Shinagawa K, et al: Beta-adrenoceptor subtypes in the ureteral smooth muscle of rats, rabbits and dogs. Eur J Pharmacol 1998;352:269-278.
12.
Biancani P, Zabinski MP, Weiss RM: Time course of ureteral changes with obstruction. Am J Physiol 1976;231:393-398.
13.
Rose JG, Gillenwater JY: Effects of obstruction on ureteral function. Urology 1978;12:139-145.
14.
Constantinou CE, Djurhuus JC: Pyeloureteral dynamics in the intact and chronically obstructed multicalyceal kidney. Am J Physiol 1981;241:R398-R411.
15.
Porpiglia F, Destefanis P, Fiori C, et al: Effectiveness of nifedipine and deflazacort in the management of distal ureter Stones. Urology 2000;56:579-582.
16.
Sigala S, Dellabella M, Milanese G, et al: Evidence fort the presence of alpha1 adrenoceptor subtypes in the human ureter. Neurourol Urodyn 2005;24:142-148.
17.
Lepor H, Shapiro E: Characterization of alpha1 adrenergic receptors in human benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol 1984;132:1226-1229.
18.
Hieble JP, Caine M, Zalaznik E: In vitro characterization of the alpha-adrenoceptors in human prostate. Eur J Pharmacol 1985;107:111-117.
19.
Gonzalez RR, Kaplan SA: First-line treatment for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. Is there a particular patient profile for a particular treatment? World J Urol 2006;24:360-366.
20.
Al-Ansari A, Al-Naimi A, Alobaidy A, et al: Efficacy of tamsulosin in the management of lower ureteral stones: a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study of 100 patients. Urology 2010;75:4-7.
21.
Wang CJ, Huang SW, Chang CH: Adjunctive medical therapy with an alpha-1A-specific blocker after shock wave lithotripsy of lower ureteral stones. Urol Int 2009;82:166-169.
22.
Agrawal M, Gupta M, Gupta A, et al: Prospective randomized trial comparing efficacy of alfuzosin and tamsulosin in management of lower ureteral stones. Urology 2005;73:706-709.
23.
Resim S, Ekerbicer H, Ciftci A: Effect of tamsulosin on the number and intensity of ureteral colic in patients with lower ureteral calculus. Int J Urol 2005;12:615-620.
24.
Yilmaz E, Batislam E, Basar MM, et al: The comparison and efficacy of 3 different alpha-1-adrenergic blockers for distal ureteral stones. J Urol 2005;173:2010-2012.
25.
Porpiglia F, Ghignone G, Fiori C, et al: Nifedipine versus tamsulosin for the management of lower ureteral stones. J Urol 2004;172:568-571.
26.
Lu Z, Dong Z, Ding H, et al: Tamsulosin for ureteral stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis of a randomized controlled trial. Urol Int 2012;89:107-115.
© 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel
2013
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.