The first arm (Group 1) was performed between January 2015 and January 2016, in which we used the Stone Cone® (Boston Scientific Corp, Natick, MA, USA) to avoid proximal stone migration. Because of some financial difficulties, we could no longer use the Stone Cone; therefore, we used a modification of the stone basket between April 2016 and September 2018 (Group 2). The present study was designed to compare the results of both techniques in the two consecutive periods.
The study comprised 208 patients who underwent ureteroscopic stone removal. Patients with ureteric stones of <15 mm treated by ureteroscopy after failure of MET and/or failure of SWL were included.
Patients with either bilateral (n = 10), or multiple (n = 24) ureteric stones and patients in whom the stone was extracted directly without disintegration (n = 16) were excluded from the study. There were 72 patients treated by Stone Cone (Group 1) and 86 treated by Dormia basket (Group 2). The study was approved by our local Ethics Committee.