Teflon Injections (STING) Mimicking Distal Ureteric Stones Diagnostic Pitfalls

Main Article Content

Wesam Al-Dhahir
Aran Nanthakumar
Priyadarshi Kumar

Abstract

This case report highlights the potential diagnostic pitfalls associated with subureteral transurethral injection (STING) of non-biodegradable materials like Teflon, which has been utilised for endoscopic correction of vesicoureteral reflux (VUR). A 27-year-old female with a history of VUR presented with left-sided loin pain, vomiting, and dysuria, which were initially thought to be due to distal ureteric stones. However, non-contrast computed tomography (CT) revealed the presence of calcific densities in the region of the distal ureter and vesicoureteric junction (VUJ) bilaterally, likely as a sequelae of previous Teflon injection treatment. A conservative management approach was undertaken, and follow-up evaluations, including MAG3 renograms, showed normal drainage and stable split renal function. This case emphasises the importance of a comprehensive medical history and vigilance in avoiding unnecessary imaging or surgical interventions
for patients with a previous history of STING.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Al-Dhahir, W., Nanthakumar, A., & Kumar, P. (2023). Teflon Injections (STING) Mimicking Distal Ureteric Stones: Diagnostic Pitfalls. Journal of Endoluminal Endourology, 6(1), e47-e52. https://doi.org/10.22374/jeleu.v6i1.149
Section
Case Reports
Author Biographies

Wesam Al-Dhahir, Department of Urology University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust

Department of Urology University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust

Aran Nanthakumar, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust

University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust · Department of Urology

 

Priyadarshi Kumar, Department of Urology University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust

Department of Urology University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust

References

1. Sargent MA. What is the normal prevalence of vesi-coureteral reflux? Pediatr Radiol. 2000 Sep;30(9): 587–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002470000263
2. Tekgül S, Riedmiller H, Hoebeke P, Kočvara  R, Nijman RJ, Radmayr C, Stein R, Dogan HS; European Association of Urology. EAU guidelines on vesicoureteral reflux in children. Eur Urol. 2012 Sep;62(3):534–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.059
3. Baybikov R, Sizonov V, Bondarenko S, Dolgov B, Dubrov V, Kagantsov I, et al. Do the type of bulking agents and injection method have any influence on the incidence of ureteral obstruction by endoscopic treatment of reflux? European Society for Paediatric Urology. 2015. https://www.espu.org/members/previous-events-abstracts
4. Vandersteen DR, Routh JC, Kirsch AJ, Scherz HC, Ritchey ML, Shapiro E, et al. Postoperative ureteral obstruction after subureteral injection of dextranomer/ hyaluronic Acid copolymer. J Urol. 2006;176:1593–5.
5. Friedmacher F, Colhoun E, Puri P. Endoscopic Injection of dextranomer/hyaluronic acid as first line treatment in 851 consecutive children with high grade vesicoureteral reflux: efficacy and long-term results. J Urol. 2018;200:650–5.
6. Friedmacher F, Puri P. Ureteral Obstruction After Endoscopic Treatment of Vesicoureteral Reflux: Does the Type of Injected Bulking Agent Matter? Curr Urol Rep. 2019 Jul 9;20(9):49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-019-0913-5
7. Sfakianos, D. J., Groutz, A., & Gomelsky, A. (2008). Ureteral obstruction after subureteric injection of a bulking agent for vesicoureteral reflux. Journal of Urology, 179(4), 1432–1436.
8. Rosenberg S, Lorber A, Landau EH, Pode D, Gofrit ON, Hidas G, Duvdevani M, Sfoungaristos S. Late ureteral obstruction in an adult who had STING/Teflon in childhood: Should we expect an epidemic? Can Urol Assoc J. 2015 Sep–Oct; 9(9–10):E754–7. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.2864