Case report reveals migration complications of a metallic ureteral stent in cervical cancer patients, suggesting careful monitoring is essential.
Hydronephrosis caused by malignant ureteral obstruction or radiotherapy-induced ureteral stenosis is a frequent complication in patients with cervical cancer. Effective management requires continuous urinary drainage, which can be achieved either internally through ureteral stent placement or externally via percutaneous nephrostomy. Among available devices, the AlliumTM fully covered nitinol mesh ureteral stent is designed to treat ureteral or urethral strictures while allowing safe and easy removal. However, serious complications have been reported, including uretero-enteric, uretero-arterial, and uretero-vaginal fistulas, pseudoaneurysm, ureteral perforation and sepsis. We report the case of a 44-year-old woman diagnosed in 2020 with stage IIIC1 cervical cancer (FIGO classification) who underwent surgery followed by adjuvant radiotherapy. In 2021, a right metallic ureteral stent was placed to treat ureteral obstruction. Two years later, she presented with right lumbar pain, and abdominal ultrasonography revealed grade III right hydronephrosis. CT scan demonstrated migration of the metallic ureteral stent into the rectal wall. Endoscopic extraction of the migrated stent was successfully performed via colonoscopy. Retrograde pyelography and CT imaging confirmed the presence of a recto-ureteral fistula. A 6 Ch/26 cm double-J ureteral stent was subsequently placed with good positioning and drainage. At the six-month follow-up, replacement of the double-J stent was performed. Imaging studies showed only minor residual hydronephrosis. Although metallic ureteral stents are effective for managing malignant ureteral obstruction, particularly in complex oncologic cases, they are not free of severe complications. The risk appears increased in patients who have undergone radiotherapy, emphasizing the need for careful monitoring and long term follow-up.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Andre et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: