Comparative analysis of re-entry malecot and nelaton catheters after standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy in adult patients: a cross-sectional study.
Complications
Nephrolithiasis
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy
Percutaneous nephrostomy
Journal
Urolithiasis
ISSN: 2194-7236
Titre abrégé: Urolithiasis
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101602699
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 Aug 2023
24 Aug 2023
Historique:
received:
31
01
2023
accepted:
31
07
2023
medline:
25
8
2023
pubmed:
24
8
2023
entrez:
24
8
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Drainage catheters are used almost routinely to provide urinary drainage, prevent extravasation of urine, and create tamponade against bleeding after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL). In the literature, there is no standardized approach to determining which type of catheter is superior. In this context, we aimed to comparatively analyze two different types of catheters (re-entry malecot catheter and nelaton catheter) in terms of success and complications, which we use for drainage after a PNL operation and which have very different costs. Patients who underwent PNL for kidney stones between January 2018 and October 2022 were included in the study. The data of a total of 148 patients who had a 16-F reentry malecot nephrostomy catheter or a 16-F nelaton catheter were analyzed. In addition to the demographic characteristics of the patients, stone characteristics, operative data, hospitalization time, analgesia requirement, hemoglobin exchange, amount of blood transfusion, and postoperative data (success and complications) were comparatively evaluated. The current unit price for a reentry malecot and a nelaton catheter is 4.7 United States dollars (USD) and 0.11 USD, respectively. There were a total of 148 patients in the study, 63 of whom were nelaton catheters and 85 were reentry malecots, and the mean age was 39.95 ± 13.28 years. There was no statistically significant difference between preoperative stone sizes and residual stone rates according to the groups. In addition, there was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of access site and stone localization. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of complication rates according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, Hb levels, blood transfusion rates, operation times, or hospitalization times. In conclusion, if a second procedure is planned, a reentry malecot catheter may be preferred. Apart from this situation, nelaton catheters should be preferred because they are similar to reentry catheters in terms of effectiveness, and side effects and are more economical than reentry catheters in terms of cost.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37615770
doi: 10.1007/s00240-023-01475-x
pii: 10.1007/s00240-023-01475-x
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
109Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Sorokin I, Mamoulakis C, Miyazawa K, Rodgers A, Talati J, Lotan Y (2017) Epidemiology of stone disease across the world. World J Urol 35:1301–1320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2008-6
doi: 10.1007/s00345-017-2008-6
pubmed: 28213860
Muslumanoglu AY, Binbay M, Yuruk E, Akman T, Tepeler A, Esen T et al (2011) Updated epidemiologic study of urolithiasis in Turkey. I: changing characteristics of urolithiasis. Urol Res 39(4):309–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-010-0346-6
doi: 10.1007/s00240-010-0346-6
pubmed: 21161646
Urolithiasis Guidelines (2022) European Association of Urology. https://uroweb.org/guidelines/urolithiasis .
Bolat MS, Akdeniz E (2017) Can CROES nephrolithometric nomogram predict postoperative outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy? New J Urol 12:25–31
Lee JK, Kim BS, Park YK (2013) Predictive factors for bleeding during percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Korean J Urol 54(7):448–453. https://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2013.54.7.448
doi: 10.4111/kju.2013.54.7.448
pubmed: 23878687
pmcid: 3715708
Akman T, Binbay M, Sari E, Yuruk E, Tepeler A, Akcay M et al (2011) Factors affecting bleeding during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: single surgeon experience. J Endourol 25(2):327–333. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2010.0302
doi: 10.1089/end.2010.0302
pubmed: 21214412
Paul EM, Marcovich R, Lee BR, Smith AD (2003) Choosing the ideal nephrostomy tube. BJU Int 92:672–677. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410x.2003.04454.x
doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2003.04454.x
pubmed: 14616443
Gupta M, Bellman GC, Smith AD (1997) Massive hemorrhage from renal vein injury during percutaneous renal surgery: endourological management. J Urol 157:795–797. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)65042-0
doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)65042-0
pubmed: 9072568
Jamil S, Ather MH (2020) The impact of post PNL tube type on blood loss and postoperative pain. Pak J Med Sci 36(3):402–406. https://doi.org/10.1266/pjms.36.3.1558
doi: 10.1266/pjms.36.3.1558
pubmed: 32292442
pmcid: 7150389
Kim SC, Tinmouth WW, Kuo RL, Paterson RF, Lingeman JE (2005) Using and choosing a nephrostomy tube after percutaneous nephrolithotomy for large or complex stone disease: a treatment strategy. J Endourol 19(3):348–352. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2005.19.348
doi: 10.1089/end.2005.19.348
pubmed: 15865526
De la Rosette JJ, Opondo D, Daels FP, Giusti G, Serrano A, Kandasami SV et al (2012) Categorisation of complications and validation of the Clavien score for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 62(2):246–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.03.055
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.03.055
pubmed: 22487016
Srinivasan AK, Herati A, Okeke Z, Smith AD (2009) Renal drainage after percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 23(10):1743–1749. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2009.1545
doi: 10.1089/end.2009.1545
pubmed: 19792862
Chang CH, Wang CJ, Huang SW (2011) Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a prospective randomized controlled study. Urol Res 39:459–465. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-011-0363-0
doi: 10.1007/s00240-011-0363-0
pubmed: 21331773
Gonen M, Ozturk B, Ozkardes H (2009) Double-j stenting compared with one night externalized ureteral catheter placement in tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 23:27–31. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2008.0382
doi: 10.1089/end.2008.0382
pubmed: 19118466
Choi M, Brusky J, Weaver J, Amantia M, Bellman GC (2006) Randomized trial comparing modified tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy with tailed stent with percutaneous nephrostomy with small-bore tube. J Endourol 20:766–770. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2006.20.766
doi: 10.1089/end.2006.20.766
pubmed: 17094752
Candela J, Davidoff R, Gerspach J, Bellman GC (1997) “Tubeless” percutaneous surgery: a new advance in the technique of percutaneous renal surgery. Tech Urol 3:6–11
pubmed: 9170218
Jiang H, Huang D, Yao S, Liu S (2017) Improving drainage after percutaneous nephrolithotomy based on health-related quality of life: a prospective randomized study. J Endourol 31(11):1131–1138. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2017.0444
doi: 10.1089/end.2017.0444
pubmed: 28891320
Kumar S, Singh S, Singh P, Singh SK (2016) Day care PNL using ‘Santosh-PGI hemostatic seal’ versus standard PNL: a randomized controlled study. Cent Eur J Urol 69(2):190–197. https://doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2016.792
doi: 10.5173/ceju.2016.792
Lightfoot M, Ng C, Engebretsen S, Wallner C, Huang G, Li R et al (2014) Analgesic use and complications following upper pole access for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 28(8):909–914. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2014.0035
doi: 10.1089/end.2014.0035
pubmed: 24548123
Michel MS, Trojan L, Rassweiler JJ (2007) Complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 51:899–906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2006.10.020
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.10.020
pubmed: 17095141
Oguz U, Resorlu B, Bayindir M, Sahin T, Bozkurt OF, Unsal A (2013) Emergent intervention criterias for controlling sever bleeding after percutaneous nephrolithotomy. ISRN Urol. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/760272
doi: 10.1155/2013/760272
pubmed: 23984105
pmcid: 3742047
Taylor E, Miller J, Chi T, Stoller ML (2012) Complications associated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Transl Androl Urol 1:223–228. https://doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2223-4683.2012.12.01
doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2223-4683.2012.12.01
pubmed: 26816715
pmcid: 4708158
Unsal A, Resorlu B, Atmaca AF, Diri A, Goktug HN, Can CE et al (2012) Prediction of morbidity and mortality after percutaneous nephrolithotomy by using the charlson comorbidity index. Urology 79(1):55–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2011.06.038
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2011.06.038
pubmed: 21855965
Lopes T, Sangam K, Alken P, Barroilhet BS, Saussine C, Shi L et al (2011) The clinical research office of the endourological society percutaneous nephrolithotomy global study: tract dilation comparisons in 5537 patients. J Endourol 25(5):755–762. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2010.0488
doi: 10.1089/end.2010.0488
pubmed: 21388242
Stoller ML, Wolf JS Jr, St Lezin MA (1994) Estimated blood loss and transfusion rates associated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Urol 152:1977–1981. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(17)32283-8
doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)32283-8
pubmed: 7966654
Seitz C, Desai M, Häcker A, Hakenberg OW, Liatsikos E, Nagele U et al (2012) Incidence, prevention, and management of complications following percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy. Eur Urol 61(1):146–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.09.016
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.09.016
pubmed: 21978422
De la Rosette J, Assimos D, Desai M, Gutierrez J, Lingeman J, Scarpa R et al (2011) The clinical research office of the endourological society percutaneous nephrolithotomy global study: indications, complications, and outcomes in 5803 patients. J Endourol 25(1):11–17. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2010.0424
doi: 10.1089/end.2010.0424
pubmed: 21247286
Tefekli A, Karadag MA, Tepeler K, Sari E, Berberoglu Y, Baykal M et al (2008) Classification of percutaneous nephrolithotomy complications using the modified Clavien grading system: looking for a standard. Eur Urol 53(1):184–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2007.06.049
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.06.049
pubmed: 17651892
Gök A, Çift A, Yücel MÖ, Atar M, Çimen S, Öztürk U et al (2018) Evaluation of complications of percutaneous nephrolithotomy operations performed at our clinic using modified Clavien classification system. Bozok Med J 8(1):5–10
Dunn JC, Lanzi J, Kusnezov N, Bader J, Waterman BR, Belmont PJ (2015) Predictors of length of stay after elective total shoulder arthroplasty in the United States. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 24(5):754–759. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2014.11.042
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2014.11.042
pubmed: 25591461
Kumar S, Karthikeyan VS, Mallya A, Keshavamurthy R (2018) Outcomes of second-look percutaneous nephrolithotomy in renal calculi-a single centre experience. Turk J Urol 44(5):406–410. https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2018.76299
doi: 10.5152/tud.2018.76299
pubmed: 30487043
pmcid: 6134977