| The case for adopting Memokath-051 compared with double-J stents for treating ureteric obstruction is partially supported by evidence. |
| The evidence is limited but suggests that in selected patients, Memokath-051 is effective at relieving ureteric obstruction and improving quality of life. When inserted by clinicians trained in using Memokath-051 specifically and in appropriate patients, Memokath-051 is associated with equivalent success rates and a better patient experience compared with double-J stents. |
| The cost consequences of adopting Memokath-051 are uncertain. However, when used in appropriate patients and by clinicians trained in its use, potential cost savings resulting from fewer repeat procedures may arise with Memokath-051. |
| The key challenges of the assessment resulted from the poor quality and quantity of available evidence and therefore uncertainty in conclusions. |