Literature DB >> 17626647

Randomized prospective evaluation of nephrostomy tube configuration: impact on postoperative pain.

Derek Weiland1, Renato N Pedro, J Kyle Anderson, Sara L Best, Courtney Lee, Kari Hendlin, Johnstone Kim, Manoj Monga.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Conduct a prospective randomized single-blind comparison of two nephrostomy catheter designs, evaluating specifically intraoperative placement and postoperative comfort.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The single-blind, prospective randomized trial was conducted with institutional review board approval. All patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy who gave informed consent were randomized to placement of either a Boston Scientific Flexima 8.3F pigtail nephrostomy tube #27-180 (PIG) or a Boston Scientific 8.2F nephroureteral stent #410-126 (NUS). Randomization was concealed from the surgeon until time of placement. Subjective intraoperative placement characteristics were rated by the surgeon on a scale of 1 = excellent, 2 = fair, 3 = good and 4 = poor. The patient's postoperative pain intensity was evaluated with a Visual Analog Pain Score (0 = no pain to 10 = worst pain).
RESULTS: Nine patients were randomized to each group. The PIG group was rated significantly better than the NUS group with regards to ease of placement (p = 0.007) and radiopacity of the tube (p = 0.007) by surgeon. Visual analog pain scores on postoperative day one, was significantly lower in the PIG group (mean = 2+/-2) than the NUS group (mean = 5+/-1) (p =0.004). The mean amount of intra-venous morphine equivalent given in the PIG group (mean = 1+/4 Eq morphine) was less on average compared to the NUS group (mean = 6+/13 Eq morphine), but the differences did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.06).
CONCLUSIONS: Following percutaneous nephrolithotomy, use of a small pig-tail nephrostomy tube results in greater ease of placement and less postoperative pain than a nephroureteral catheter.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17626647     DOI: 10.1590/s1677-55382007000300003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Braz J Urol        ISSN: 1677-5538            Impact factor:   1.541


  5 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

Review 2.  Effect of Body Mass Index on Outcomes of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Yan Xu; Xiaolin Huang
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-06-14

Review 3.  Intraoperative and postoperative feasibility and safety of total tubeless, tubeless, small-bore tube, and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of 16 randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Joo Yong Lee; Seong Uk Jeh; Man Deuk Kim; Dong Hyuk Kang; Jong Kyou Kwon; Won Sik Ham; Young Deuk Choi; Kang Su Cho
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2017-06-27       Impact factor: 2.264

4.  Efficacy of Intercostal Nerve Block for Pain Control After Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Tao Chen; ZhenQiang Zhu; Jianlong Du
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2021-01-28

5.  A comparison of the efficacy of intercostal nerve block and peritubal infiltration of ropivacaine for post-operative analgesia following percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A prospective randomised double-blind study.

Authors:  Nirmala Jonnavithula; Raveendra Reddy Chirra; Sai Lakshman Pasupuleti; Rahul Devraj; Vidyasagar Sriramoju; Murthy Vln Pisapati
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2017-08
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.