Nephrostomy tube versus ureteral stent for obstructing septic calculi: A nationwide propensity score-matched analysis

Rachel Wong, Jennifer Ziegler, Dhiraj S Bal, Sylvain A Lother, Premal Patel, Barret Rush
{"title":"Nephrostomy tube versus ureteral stent for obstructing septic calculi: A nationwide propensity score-matched analysis","authors":"Rachel Wong, Jennifer Ziegler, Dhiraj S Bal, Sylvain A Lother, Premal Patel, Barret Rush","doi":"10.3138/jammi-2023-0030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sepsis secondary to obstructive uropathy is a urological emergency that requires urgent decompression using placement of a percutaneous nephrostomy tube (PCN) or retrograde ureteric stent (RUS). Whether selection of PCN or RUS impacts mortality remains uncertain. We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis using the 2006–2014 Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) of 34,009 patients with sepsis and obstructive uropathy who were treated with RUS or PCN. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, need for mechanical ventilation and dialysis. Multivariate logistic regression and propensity matched analyses were used to evaluate the effect of PCN or RUS on in-hospital mortality. A total of 9,828 (28.9%) patients were treated with PCN and 24,181 (71.1%) with RUS. The unadjusted mortality for PCN versus RUN patients was 5.3% compared with 2.8%. Those treated with PCN had a higher likelihood of requiring mechanical ventilation or hemodialysis. In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, RUS had lower odds of mortality compared to PCN (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.63–0.83, p < 0.01). After propensity score matching, the mortality for the RUS group was 3.4% and 4.0% in the PCN group ( p = 0.19). There were no significant differences in mortality for patients treated with PCN or RUS after propensity matching. Method of decompression should be guided by local practice. Further prospective randomized trials are needed.","PeriodicalId":509806,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada","volume":"47 33","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/jammi-2023-0030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Sepsis secondary to obstructive uropathy is a urological emergency that requires urgent decompression using placement of a percutaneous nephrostomy tube (PCN) or retrograde ureteric stent (RUS). Whether selection of PCN or RUS impacts mortality remains uncertain. We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis using the 2006–2014 Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) of 34,009 patients with sepsis and obstructive uropathy who were treated with RUS or PCN. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, need for mechanical ventilation and dialysis. Multivariate logistic regression and propensity matched analyses were used to evaluate the effect of PCN or RUS on in-hospital mortality. A total of 9,828 (28.9%) patients were treated with PCN and 24,181 (71.1%) with RUS. The unadjusted mortality for PCN versus RUN patients was 5.3% compared with 2.8%. Those treated with PCN had a higher likelihood of requiring mechanical ventilation or hemodialysis. In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, RUS had lower odds of mortality compared to PCN (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.63–0.83, p < 0.01). After propensity score matching, the mortality for the RUS group was 3.4% and 4.0% in the PCN group ( p = 0.19). There were no significant differences in mortality for patients treated with PCN or RUS after propensity matching. Method of decompression should be guided by local practice. Further prospective randomized trials are needed.
肾造瘘管与输尿管支架治疗化脓性结石梗阻:全国范围内的倾向评分匹配分析
继发于梗阻性尿路病的败血症是一种泌尿科急症,需要通过放置经皮肾造瘘管(PCN)或逆行输尿管支架(RUS)进行紧急减压。选择 PCN 或 RUS 是否会影响死亡率仍不确定。我们利用 2006-2014 年全国住院患者样本 (NIS) 对 34009 名接受 RUS 或 PCN 治疗的脓毒症和梗阻性尿病患者进行了回顾性队列分析。主要结果是院内死亡率。次要结果包括住院时间、机械通气需求和透析需求。多变量逻辑回归和倾向匹配分析用于评估 PCN 或 RUS 对院内死亡率的影响。共有 9828 名患者(28.9%)接受了 PCN 治疗,24181 名患者(71.1%)接受了 RUS 治疗。PCN 与 RUN 相比,未经调整的死亡率分别为 5.3% 和 2.8%。接受 PCN 治疗的患者需要机械通气或血液透析的可能性更高。在多变量逻辑回归分析中,与 PCN 相比,RUS 的死亡率较低(OR 0.72,95% CI 0.63-0.83,P <0.01)。经过倾向评分匹配后,RUS 组的死亡率为 3.4%,PCN 组为 4.0% ( p = 0.19)。倾向匹配后,PCN 或 RUS 治疗患者的死亡率无明显差异。减压方法应根据当地实际情况而定。需要进一步开展前瞻性随机试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信