Literature DB >> 11796272

Tail stent versus re-entry tube: a randomized comparison after percutaneous stone extraction.

Evangelos N Liatsikos1, David Hom, Caner Z Dinlenc, Rakesh Kapoor, Mihai Alexianu, Paulos Yohannes, Arthur D Smith.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of a 7F tail stent with an 18F Councill nephrostomy tube and compare it to a 24F re-entry Malecot nephrostomy tube after percutaneous nephrolithotomy.
METHODS: Forty patients were prospectively randomized to receive either a 24F re-entry Malecot nephrostomy tube (group A, n = 20) or a 7F tail stent with an 18F Councill nephrostomy tube (group B, n = 20) for postoperative drainage. Patients were evaluated with an analogue scale questionnaire 15 days after percutaneous nephrolithotomy at the routine office follow-up visit asking them to rate the flank pain on a 0 to 10 scale, urinary urgency on a 0 to 10 scale, and quality of life, while the external drainage tubes were still in place.
RESULTS: The mean length of stay was 4.5 and 3.5 days for groups A and B, respectively. Flank urine leakage was present in all patients in group A for a period of 6 to 12 hours, and no patient in group B had any significant flank drainage. A statistically significant reduction of flank pain in favor of group B was observed (P = 0.0002). We did not observe any statistically significant difference when evaluating the urgency (P = 0.1) and quality-of-life scores (P = 0.09) between the two groups, even though a trend was noted toward amelioration in favor of group B patients.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study suggest that the 7F tail stent is certainly better tolerated by the patients after percutaneous nephrolithotomy compared with the standard 24F re-entry Malecot nephrostomy tube.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11796272     DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(01)01475-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  11 in total

Review 1.  How urgent is urgency? A review of current methods of assessment.

Authors:  R M Freeman
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2004-11-18

2.  Ureteral stents: new ideas, new designs.

Authors:  Abdulrahman Al-Aown; Iason Kyriazis; Panagiotis Kallidonis; Pantelis Kraniotis; Christos Rigopoulos; Dimitrios Karnabatidis; Theodore Petsas; Evangelos Liatsikos
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2010-04

Review 3.  Highlights of the university of toronto urology update 2014.

Authors:  Sender Herschorn
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2015 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.862

4.  The Circle Nephrostomy Tube: An Attractive Nephrostomy Drainage System Following Complex Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy.

Authors:  Marawan M El Tayeb; Michael S Borofsky; James E Lingeman
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2017-01-17       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: yes but when? A multicentre retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Murat M Rifaioglu; Kadir Onem; Ibrahim Buldu; Tuna Karatag; Mustafa Okan Istanbulluoglu
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2014-01-28       Impact factor: 3.436

Review 6.  Advances in tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy and patient selection: an update.

Authors:  Mitra R de Cógáin; Amy E Krambeck
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 3.092

7.  Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy in selected patients: a prospective randomized comparison.

Authors:  Ahmet Tefekli; Fatih Altunrende; Kadir Tepeler; Aytul Tas; Sabahattin Aydin; Ahmet Y Muslumanoglu
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2006-12-14       Impact factor: 2.266

8.  Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy with Amplatz and Alken Dilators: An Eight-Year Single Tertiary Care Centre Experience.

Authors:  Piotr Bryniarski; Paweł Stelmach; Piotr Taborowski; Paweł Rajwa; Mateusz Adamkiewicz; Marcin Życzkowski; Andrzej Paradysz
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2016-12-14

9.  Ureteral stent discomfort: Etiology and management.

Authors:  Ricardo Miyaoka; Manoj Monga
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2009 Oct-Dec

Review 10.  Biomaterials in urology.

Authors:  Darren T Beiko; Bodo E Knudsen; James D Watterson; John D Denstedt
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.862

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.