ArticleArab journal of urology2026
A 6-year retrospective cost-effectiveness analysis of Memokath ureteric stents vs double-J stents - single-centre assessment.
Article in Arab journal of urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Double-J (JJ) stents are widely used in obstructive uropathy but are associated with encrustation, infection, migration, and the need for repeated exchanges. Metallic ureteric stents such as the Memokath-051 (MMK), in use since 1996, demonstrate high patency rates and efficacy in both benign and malignant ureteric strictures. While prior studies suggest cost-effectiveness over JJ stents, UK-specific data remain limited. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness, function, and safety of MMK in chronic obstructive uropathy. Materials and Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of adult patients who underwent MMK insertion between March 2016 and August 2022 for malignant or benign ureteric strictures. Patients with pregnancy, acute sepsis, or acute renal failure were excluded. The primary outcome was cost-effectiveness compared with JJ stent exchanges. Secondary outcomes were stent function and safety. Results: Twenty-one patients (10 men, 11 women) were included, with a median age of 69 years (range:46-86). Left ureteric stents accounted for 38%, right ureteric in 52%, and bilaterally in 10%. 81% benign obstruction, with the remaining malignant. Stent lengths ranged from 6-15 cm.After a follow-up of up to 65 months, 52% of patients retained their MMK stent in situ. 20% required removal due to encrustation or haematuria, and 10% experienced spontaneous stent migration. Overall, 70% were successfully managed with MMK. 20% died with the stent in situ (mean duration:15 months). 18% retained stents for >6 months (median: 25 months).Total cost savings were £42,890 compared with repeated JJ stent exchanges, increasing proportionally with stent dwell time. No MMK-related infections or infection-related admissions occurred. Conclusion: Memokath-051 is a safe and cost-effective option for chronic obstructive uropathy, with a clinical success rate of 72% and substantial cost savings, particularly in benign strictures. Patients with malignant obstruction may benefit clinically, though shorter stent duration reduces cost-effectiveness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.