Home > Journals > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica > Past Issues > Articles online first > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2020 Jan 07

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Cite this article as

 

 

Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2020 Jan 07

DOI: 10.23736/S0393-2249.19.03643-9

Copyright © 2019 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Efficacy and safety of renal drainage options for percutaneous nephrolithotomy

João PIMENTEL TORRES 1 , João N. OLIVEIRA 2, Nuno MORAIS 1, Sara ANACLETO 1, Ricardo M. RODRIGUES 1, Paulo MOTA 1, 2, Ricardo LEÃO 1, 3, Estevão LIMA 1, 2

1 Urology Department, Hospital de Braga, Braga, Portugal; 2 Life and Health Sciences Research Institute, University of Minho, Minho, Portugal; 3 Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal


PDF


BACKGROUND: Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the gold-standard for treatment of renal stones larger than 20 millimeters. Traditionally, a nephrostomy tube (NT) is placed, causing discomfort and prolonged hospitalization but some surgeons prefer the tubeless technique (TL). Simultaneously, the effectiveness of ureteral stents after PNCL is doubtful. We investigated the safety of the TL technique as well as that of the single loop (SL) over double loop (DL) stents.
METHODS: 321 individuals submitted to PCNL in a single center were retrospectively reviewed. Statistical analysis was performed to compare procedures regarding safety and effectiveness (stone size, residual stones, operative time, peri- and post-operative complications, need for blood transfusion and length of hospital stay) between two groups regarding presence or absence of NT placement (NT (n=198) vs. TL (n=123)); and according to the type of stent used (SL (n=74) vs. DL (n=247)).
RESULTS: NT was associated with a higher complications rate compared to the TL (30,3% and 13%, respectively; p=0.001) and longer hospitalization (4 vs. 2 days; p=0.001). Regarding ureteral stents, they cause similar morbidities (20,7% and 24,4%; p=0.881), and median length of stay (3 days; p=0.947). NT and DL were more frequent in patients with higher stone burden.
CONCLUSIONS: Tubeless PCNL encompasses lower morbidity and should be considered as an option for select patients, particularly with less stone burden and uncomplicated procedures. Regarding ureteral stents, SL is a safe option and does not require further procedures for removal.


KEY WORDS: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy; Percutaneous nephrostomy; Ureteral catheterization; Safety

top of page