{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.052967453733248245, 'fraction_numerical': 0.042756860242501596, 'mean_word_length': 4.107491856677524, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison of symptoms related to positioning of double-pigtail stent in upper pole versus renal pelvis.

PURPOSE
This study was a comparison of the symptomatology associated with placement of the upper coil of a double-pigtail stent in the upper pole or the renal pelvis.


PATIENTS AND METHODS
A prospective study with 40 patients was performed. In 20 patients, the stent was placed in the upper pole (Group A) and in another 20 patients (Group B) in the renal pelvis. A questionnaire was addressed to all patients before the removal of the stent concerning the presence and severity of flank pain (using a standardized 10-point scale), the presence and severity of urinary urgency (using a standardized 10-point scale), the presence of dysuria, and quality of life with the stent in place.


RESULTS
Flank pain was present in 17 (85%) and 15 (75%) patients in Groups A and B, respectively. The average severity of flank pain was 4.3 (range 0-7) and 4.5 (range 0-10) in Group A and B, respectively (p = 0.764). Urinary urgency was present in 13 (65%) and 15 (75%), patients in Group A and B, respectively. The average severity of urgency was 3.1 (range 0-7) and 5.3 (range 0-10) in Group A and B, respectively (p = 0.037). Dysuria was present in 4 (20%) and 13 (65%), and the average quality of life score was 2.5 and 3.05 in Group A and B, respectively (p = 0.04).


CONCLUSION
Positioning of the proximal end of the double-pigtail stent in the upper pole of the kidney appears to be better tolerated by patients than is the standard insertion in the renal pelvis.