João Pimentel Torres, João N Oliveira, Nuno Morais, Sara Anacleto, Ricardo M Rodrigues, Paulo Mota, Ricardo Leão, Estevão Lima
{"title":"经皮肾镜取石术中肾引流方法的有效性和安全性。","authors":"João Pimentel Torres, João N Oliveira, Nuno Morais, Sara Anacleto, Ricardo M Rodrigues, Paulo Mota, Ricardo Leão, Estevão Lima","doi":"10.23736/S0393-2249.19.03643-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the gold-standard for treatment of renal stones larger than 20 mm. 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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three hundred and twenty-one 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]).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":49015,"journal":{"name":"Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica","volume":" ","pages":"629-636"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and safety of renal drainage options for percutaneous nephrolithotomy.\",\"authors\":\"João Pimentel Torres, João N Oliveira, Nuno Morais, Sara Anacleto, Ricardo M Rodrigues, Paulo Mota, Ricardo Leão, Estevão Lima\",\"doi\":\"10.23736/S0393-2249.19.03643-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the gold-standard for treatment of renal stones larger than 20 mm. 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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three hundred and twenty-one 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]).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49015,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"629-636\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0393-2249.19.03643-9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/1/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0393-2249.19.03643-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
摘要
背景:经皮肾镜取石术(PCNL)是治疗大于20mm肾结石的金标准。传统上,放置肾造瘘管(NT)会引起不适并延长住院时间,但一些外科医生更喜欢无管技术(TL)。同时,PNCL术后输尿管支架的有效性值得怀疑。我们研究了TL技术的安全性以及单环(SL)与双环(DL)支架的安全性。方法:对某中心321例PCNL患者进行回顾性分析。统计分析比较两组是否放置NT的安全性和有效性(结石大小、残留结石、手术时间、手术前后并发症、输血需求和住院时间)(NT [N。=198] vs. TL [N.=123]);根据支架的类型(SL [N.]=74] vs. DL [n =247])。结果:与TL相比,NT的并发症发生率更高(分别为30.3%和13%;P=0.001)和更长的住院时间(4天vs. 2天;P = 0.001)。输尿管支架的发病率相似,分别为20.7%和24.4%;P=0.881),中位住院时间(3天;P = 0.947)。结石负担高的患者更常发生NT和DL。结论:无管PCNL具有较低的发病率,应考虑作为选择性患者的选择,特别是结石负担少且手术简单的患者。对于输尿管支架,SL是一种安全的选择,不需要进一步的手术切除。
Efficacy and safety of renal drainage options for percutaneous nephrolithotomy.
Background: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the gold-standard for treatment of renal stones larger than 20 mm. 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: Three hundred and twenty-one 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.
期刊介绍:
The journal Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica publishes scientific papers on nephrology and urology. Manuscripts may be submitted in the form of Minerva opinion editorials, editorial comments, original articles, video illustrated articles, review articles and letters to the Editor.