Percutaneous nephrostomy in obstructing pelvic malignancy does not facilitate further oncological treatment.
Nephrostomy
Obstructing pelvic malignancy
Quality of Life
Journal
International urology and nephrology
ISSN: 1573-2584
Titre abrégé: Int Urol Nephrol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 0262521
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2020
Sep 2020
Historique:
received:
01
03
2020
accepted:
08
04
2020
pubmed:
23
4
2020
medline:
21
5
2021
entrez:
23
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The optimal management of patients with ureteric obstruction in advanced malignancy is unclear. How quality of life is affected by a nephrostomy and how many of these patients undergo further oncological treatment remains uncertain. The objective of this retrospective multicentre study was to look at the outcomes of patients who had percutaneous nephrostomy insertion for malignancy. We identified patients who had a nephrostomy inserted for ureteric obstruction due to malignancy at our institution from January 2015 to December 2018. We obtained data retrospectively from our electronic patient record system. Patients who had nephrostomy insertion for other causes such as ureteric calculi or injury were excluded from the study. 105 patients underwent nephrostomy insertion during this time interval. 51.42% patients (n = 54) had urological malignancies (bladder and/or prostate cancer). The median LOS was 14 days (range 1-104 days) post-procedure and 39.04% (n = 41) had at least one 30-day readmission to hospital. The average starting creatinine level was 348 mmol/L (range 49-1133) and the average creatinine at discharge was 170 mmol/L (range 44-651). Although the average change in the creatinine (190 mmol/L) is statistically significant (p < 0.001), it did not seem to prolong life of the patients. Only 26 (24.76%) patients were alive (all-cause mortality) at the end of the 4-year period with an average life expectancy of 139 days following nephrostomy. Only 30.47% (n = 32) patients underwent further oncological treatment. In our series, most patients who had nephrostomy insertion for ureteric obstruction due to malignancy had no further oncological treatment following insertion. Percutaneous nephrostomy is a procedure not without associated morbidity and does not always prolong survival. Due to the poor prognosis in cases of advanced malignancy, we advocate multi-disciplinary decision-making prior to nephrostomy insertion.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32319003
doi: 10.1007/s11255-020-02466-2
pii: 10.1007/s11255-020-02466-2
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1625-1628Références
Crit Care. 2013 Jun 15;17(3):R108
pubmed: 23767877
J R Soc Med. 2018 Apr;111(4):125-135
pubmed: 29648512
BJU Int. 2016 Feb;117(2):266-71
pubmed: 25327474
Clin Radiol. 2005 May;60(5):608-12
pubmed: 15851050
J Urol. 2007 Jul;178(1):178-83; discussion 183
pubmed: 17499300
J Urol. 2008 Aug;180(2):618-21; discussion 621
pubmed: 18554655
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2013 Oct;36(5):1355-63
pubmed: 23404519
Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2005 Jan;87(1):21-4
pubmed: 15720902
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2008 Aug;36(2):185-90
pubmed: 18395404
Cancer. 1999 Feb 15;85(4):998-1003
pubmed: 10091780
Kidney Int. 1985 Jun;27(6):928-37
pubmed: 4021321
Clin Biochem Rev. 2016 Dec;37(4):153-175
pubmed: 28167845
J Urol. 2011 Feb;185(2):556-61
pubmed: 21168872
J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2011 Aug;37(8):1061-70
pubmed: 21481096
Br J Urol. 1991 Feb;67(2):169-72
pubmed: 2004230
Int J Clin Oncol. 2019 Mar;24(3):306-312
pubmed: 30298199