<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>11(4)</volume><submitter>Glienke M</submitter><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>This monocentric, randomized controlled trial aims to compare the outcomes of kidney transplant recipients with magnetic double-J (DJ) stents versus conventional DJ stents. Specifically, we assessed stent-related symptoms, procedural difficulties, pain and duration of removal, and associated costs.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>A total of 30 patients were randomly assigned to receive either a magnetic DJ (mDJ) stent or a conventional, standard DJ (sDJ) stent during kidney transplantation using the Lich-Gregoir technique. Quality of life was evaluated with the USSQ 7-10 d postoperation. sDJs stents were removed cystoscopically by a urologist while mDJ stents were removed bedside by a transplant surgeon. The duration of removal and procedure-associated pain were documented. Questionnaire</pubmed_abstract><journal>Transplantation direct</journal><pagination>e1773</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC11896100</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><pubmed_title>Comparison of Magnetic and Conventional Double-J Stent Following Kidney Transplantation: A Randomized Controlled Trial.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC11896100</pmcid><pubmed_authors>Kunzelmann M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gratzke C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Glienke M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Miernik A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Pohlmann PF</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Claes S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Sigle A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Janigen B</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Comparison of Magnetic and Conventional Double-J Stent Following Kidney Transplantation: A Randomized Controlled Trial.</name><description>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>This monocentric, randomized controlled trial aims to compare the outcomes of kidney transplant recipients with magnetic double-J (DJ) stents versus conventional DJ stents. Specifically, we assessed stent-related symptoms, procedural difficulties, pain and duration of removal, and associated costs.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>A total of 30 patients were randomly assigned to receive either a magnetic DJ (mDJ) stent or a conventional, standard DJ (sDJ) stent during kidney transplantation using the Lich-Gregoir technique. Quality of life was evaluated with the USSQ 7-10 d postoperation. sDJs stents were removed cystoscopically by a urologist while mDJ stents were removed bedside by a transplant surgeon. The duration of removal and procedure-associated pain were documented. Questionnaire</description><dates><release>2025-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2025 Apr</publication><modification>2025-04-04T01:12:59.973Z</modification><creation>2025-04-04T01:12:59.973Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC11896100</accession><cross_references><pubmed>40078823</pubmed><doi>10.1097/TXD.0000000000001773</doi></cross_references></HashMap>