Article PDF first page preview

First page of Outpatient vs. Inpatient Ureterorenoscopy – A Retrospective Dual-Center Analysis

Introduction Germany’s 2025 hospital reform promotes outpatient care, yet ureterorenoscopy (URS) remains predominantly inpatient. This study compares outcomes of outpatient versus inpatient URS. Methods This retrospective dual-center study compared patients who underwent ureterorenoscopy (URS) in either an inpatient (Regensburg) or outpatient (Landshut) setting. Surgical parameters, stone-free status, and postoperative complications (classified by Clavien-Dindo) were analyzed. Risk factors for complications were evaluated using Chi-square testing. Results Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. Complication rates—particularly Clavien-Dindo grade II—were higher in the outpatient cohort. Residual stone rates, surgical time, and postoperative fever did not differ significantly. Residual stones (p < 0.001) and surgical time above the median (p = 0.003) were identified as significant risk factors for postoperative complications. Conclusion Outpatient ureterorenoscopy is a safe and effective alternative to inpatient treatment, with comparable stone-free rates, operative times, and postoperative fever incidence. The higher rate of minor complications in the outpatient setting likely reflects a more precautionary antibiotic management strategy rather than increased clinical severity. These findings support broader implementation of outpatient URS, while emphasizing the need for antibiotic stewardship and further prospective, multicenter investigations.

This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.