{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016998542982030112, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004371053909664886, 'mean_word_length': 5.889632107023411, '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}}
Transrectal Ureteroscopic Stone Management in a Patient with Ureterosigmoidostomy.

Background: Published case reports on the management of ureteral stones in patients with prior ureterosigmoidostomy have described the challenges of direct retrograde access to the ureter using standard endourologic instruments. In light of these challenges, reported effective techniques have involved either (1) direct retrograde access utilizing sigmoid endoscopy with air insufflation or (2) percutaneous antegrade access. We report the first experience of effective retrograde ureteroscopy utilizing traditional endourologic instruments in a patient without percutaneous access. Case Presentation: The patient is a 70-year-old man born with bladder exstrophy who underwent end colostomy and ureterosigmoidostomy as a child. He presented with a symptomatic 6 mm stone at the right ureterosigmoid junction. A trial of spontaneous passage failed because of persistent pain. Treatment options were limited by the patient's recent history of coronary stent placement, requiring uninterrupted antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel. As such, we attempted retrograde ureteroscopy through a transrectal approach. Anticipating some difficulty in the identification of the ureteral orifices, we administered methylene blue at the time of induction. After placing the patient in lithotomy position, we advanced a flexible cystoscope to the rectosigmoid junction where we identified a ureteral orifice. Guidewire access was obtained and we confirmed right-sided laterality with fluoroscopic imaging. A semirigid ureteroscope was passed to the ureterosigmoid junction where the stone was encountered and retrieved intact using a basket. A 6 × 26 Double-J stent was placed with a string to facilitate removal 5 days later. The postoperative course was unremarkable. Conclusion: Despite the previously reported challenges of the approach, retrograde ureteroscopy without percutaneous access represents a viable treatment option for ureteral stones in patients with ureterosigmoidostomy.