Literature DB >> 15247731

A prospective randomized comparison of type of nephrostomy drainage following percutaneous nephrostolithotomy: large bore versus small bore versus tubeless.

Mahesh R Desai1, Rajesh A Kukreja, Mihir M Desai, Sumeet S Mhaskar, Kishore A Wani, Snehal H Patel, Sharad D Bapat.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We compared postoperative outcomes among tubeless, conventional large bore nephrostomy drainage and small bore nephrostomy drainage following percutaneous nephrostolithotomy (PCNL) in a prospective randomized fashion.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January and June 2001, 30 patients undergoing PCNL were randomized to receive conventional large bore (20Fr) nephrostomy drainage (group 1, 10 patients), small bore (9Fr) nephrostomy drainage (group 2, 10 patients) or no nephrostomy drainage (group 3, 10 patients). Inclusion criteria included a single subcostal tract, uncomplicated procedure, normal preoperative renal function and complete stone clearance. Factors compared among the 3 groups were postoperative analgesia requirement, urinary extravasation, duration of hematuria, duration of urinary leak, decrease in hematocrit and hospital stay.
RESULTS: The postoperative analgesic requirement was significantly higher in group 1 (217 mg) compared to groups 2 (140 mg, p <0.05) and 3 (87.5 mg, p <0.0001). Patients in group 3 had a significantly shorter duration (4.8 hours) of urinary leak through the percutaneous renal tract compared to patients in groups 1 (21.4 hours, p <0.05) and 2 (13.2 hours, p <0.05). Hospital stay was significantly shorter in group 3 (3.4 days) compared to groups 1 (4.4 days, p <0.05) and 2 (4.3 days, p <0.05). All 3 groups were similar in terms of operative time, duration of hematuria and decrease in hematocrit. Postoperative ultrasound did not reveal significant urinary extravasation in any case.
CONCLUSIONS: Tubeless PCNL is associated with the least postoperative pain, urinary leakage and hospital stay. Small bore nephrostomy drainage may be a reasonable option in patients in whom the incidence of stent dysuria is likely to be higher.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15247731     DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000130752.97414.c8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  49 in total

Review 1.  The efficacy and safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Haichao Yuan; Shuo Zheng; Liangren Liu; Ping Han; Jia Wang; Qiang Wei
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2011-01-30

2.  Truly tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Authors:  R J Cetti; S R Keoghane; B H Walmsley
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 1.891

3.  Which factors may effect urinary leakage following percutaneous nephrolithotomy?

Authors:  Ayhan Dirim; Tahsin Turunc; Baris Kuzgunbay; Eray Hasirci; Mehmet Ilteris Tekin; Hakan Ozkardes
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2010-09-26       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 4.  Hemostatic plug: novel technique for closure of percutaneous nephrostomy tract.

Authors:  Joel E Abbott; Arman Cicic; Roger W Jump; Julio G Davalos
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2014-10-16       Impact factor: 2.942

5.  [Clinical value of percutaneous nephrolithotomy].

Authors:  T Knoll; G Wendt-Nordahl; P Alken
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 6.  Appropriate kidney stone size for ureteroscopic lithotripsy: When to switch to a percutaneous approach.

Authors:  Ryoji Takazawa; Sachi Kitayama; Toshihiko Tsujii
Journal:  World J Nephrol       Date:  2015-02-06

7.  Comparison of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the treatment of large kidney stones: a randomized prospective study.

Authors:  Ali Güler; Akif Erbin; Burak Ucpinar; Metin Savun; Omer Sarilar; Mehmet Fatih Akbulut
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 3.436

Review 8.  [Technical innovations in endourological stone therapy].

Authors:  P Honeck; U Nagele; M S Michel
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 0.639

9.  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

10.  Randomized prospective trial of tubeless versus conventional minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Authors:  Yong Lu; Ji-Gen Ping; Xiao-Jun Zhao; Lin-Kun Hu; Jin-Xian Pu
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2012-08-19       Impact factor: 4.226

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.