Literature DB >> 19326109

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: tubeless or not tubeless?

Guido Giusti1, Alessandro Piccinelli, Orazio Maugeri, Alessio Benetti, Gianluigi Taverna, Pierpaolo Graziotti.   

Abstract

The objective of this study is to evaluate the safety and outcomes of tubeless PCNL in comparison with standard PCNL. Since June 2002, we have performed 99 tubeless PCNL. Tubeless technique involves antegrade placement of a 6Fr double-J stent without nephrostomy tube at the end of the procedure. This series has been compared with a total of 110 patients in which revision of operative reports ruled out the presence of intraoperative conditions necessary to candidate a patient to tubeless procedure but standard PCNL was performed because prior to its introduction or because of surgeon's attitude afterward. Mean stone burden was 5.4 for standard group and 4.9 cm(2) for tubeless group, respectively. Mean BMI was 24.1 in the first group and 23.6 in the second one. In this retrospective study, complications rate, postoperative pain, length of hospitalization and convalescence were evaluated by chart review. Hematocrit drop did not differ significantly between tubeless PCNL and standard PCNL (5.5 vs. 5.9%). Conversely, there was statistically significant difference between tubeless and standard PCNL in terms of the amount of analgesics (49.5 vs. 84.2 mg), immediate postoperative patients' discomfort, hospitalization (2.2 vs. 5.3 days) and time to resume normal activities (11.0 vs. 16.5 days). In conclusion, in our series, tubeless approach did not determine increase in complication rate. Conversely, tubeless PCNL reduced analgesics' requirement, patients' discomfort, hospitalization and time to recovery. As such, at our institution, tubeless PCNL has become routine procedure that actually is feasible in almost two-third of renal calculi suitable for percutaneous treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19326109     DOI: 10.1007/s00240-009-0183-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urol Res        ISSN: 0300-5623


  20 in total

Review 1.  Guidelines on urolithiasis.

Authors:  H G Tiselius; D Ackermann; P Alken; C Buck; P Conort; M Gallucci
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 20.096

2.  Use of fibrin glue in percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Authors:  Albert A Mikhail; John S Kaptein; Gary C Bellman
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 2.649

3.  Miniperc? No, thank you!

Authors:  Guido Giusti; Alessandro Piccinelli; Gianluigi Taverna; Alessio Benetti; Luisa Pasini; Matteo Corinti; Alessandro Teppa; Silvia Zandegiacomo de Zorzi; Pierpaolo Graziotti
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2006-08-11       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 4.  Consensus conference. Prevention and treatment of kidney stones.

Authors: 
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1988-08-19       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Estimated blood loss and transfusion rates associated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Authors:  M L Stoller; J S Wolf; M A St Lezin
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Almost totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: further evolution of the technique.

Authors:  M Goh; J S Wolf
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 2.942

Review 7.  Percutaneous nephrolithotomy and its legacy.

Authors:  A Skolarikos; G Alivizatos; J J M C H de la Rosette
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 20.096

8.  Tubeless percutaneous renal surgery.

Authors:  G C Bellman; R Davidoff; J Candela; J Gerspach; S Kurtz; L Stout
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 7.450

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

Authors:  Mahesh R Desai; Rajesh A Kukreja; Mihir M Desai; Sumeet S Mhaskar; Kishore A Wani; Snehal H Patel; Sharad D Bapat
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Pain after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: impact of nephrostomy tube size.

Authors:  Paul K Pietrow; Brian K Auge; Costas D Lallas; Robert W Santa-Cruz; Glenn E Newman; David M Albala; Glenn M Preminger
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 2.942

View more
  5 in total

1.  Tubeless procedure reduces hospitalization and pain after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: results of a multivariable analysis.

Authors:  Marco Garofalo; Cristian Vincenzo Pultrone; Riccardo Schiavina; Eugenio Brunocilla; Francesco Sanguedolce; Marco Borghesi; Christian Rocca; Chiara Del Prete; Antonio Maria Morselli-Labate; Alexandro Paccapelo; Giuseppe Martorana
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2013-04-30       Impact factor: 3.436

2.  Preliminary study of percutaneous nephrolithotomy on an ambulatory basis.

Authors:  Magdy Ahmed El-Tabey; Osama Abdel-Wahab Abd-Allah; Ahmed Sebaey Ahmed; Ehab Mohammed El-Barky; Yasser Abdel-Sattar Noureldin
Journal:  Curr Urol       Date:  2014-02-10

3.  Day care PNL using 'Santosh-PGI hemostatic seal' versus standard PNL: A randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Santosh Kumar; Shivanshu Singh; Prashant Singh; Shrawan Kumar Singh
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2016-06-20

4.  Outcome of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy in elder patients: A single-center experience from a developing country.

Authors:  Nadeem Iqbal; Sajid Iqbal; Aisha Hasan; Aimen Iqbal; Keron A A Blair; Dan M J Milstein; Saeed Akhter
Journal:  J Clin Transl Res       Date:  2022-03-19

5.  Comparison of outcomes of tubed versus tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children: A single center study.

Authors:  Nadeem Iqbal; Salman Assad; Ijaz Hussain; Yumna Hassan; Hafsa Khan; Muhammad Armaghan Farooq; Saeed Akhter
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2018-01-08
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.