Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Urolithiasis 3/2009

01-06-2009 | Original Paper

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: tubeless or not tubeless?

Authors: Guido Giusti, Alessandro Piccinelli, Orazio Maugeri, Alessio Benetti, Gianluigi Taverna, Pierpaolo Graziotti

Published in: Urolithiasis | Issue 3/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

The objective of this study is to evaluate the safety and outcomes of tubeless PCNL in comparison with standard PCNL. Since June 2002, we have performed 99 tubeless PCNL. Tubeless technique involves antegrade placement of a 6Fr double-J stent without nephrostomy tube at the end of the procedure. This series has been compared with a total of 110 patients in which revision of operative reports ruled out the presence of intraoperative conditions necessary to candidate a patient to tubeless procedure but standard PCNL was performed because prior to its introduction or because of surgeon’s attitude afterward. Mean stone burden was 5.4 for standard group and 4.9 cm2 for tubeless group, respectively. Mean BMI was 24.1 in the first group and 23.6 in the second one. In this retrospective study, complications rate, postoperative pain, length of hospitalization and convalescence were evaluated by chart review. Hematocrit drop did not differ significantly between tubeless PCNL and standard PCNL (5.5 vs. 5.9%). Conversely, there was statistically significant difference between tubeless and standard PCNL in terms of the amount of analgesics (49.5 vs. 84.2 mg), immediate postoperative patients’ discomfort, hospitalization (2.2 vs. 5.3 days) and time to resume normal activities (11.0 vs. 16.5 days). In conclusion, in our series, tubeless approach did not determine increase in complication rate. Conversely, tubeless PCNL reduced analgesics’ requirement, patients’ discomfort, hospitalization and time to recovery. As such, at our institution, tubeless PCNL has become routine procedure that actually is feasible in almost two-third of renal calculi suitable for percutaneous treatment.
Literature
4.
go back to reference Goh M, Wolf JS Jr (1999) Almost totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: further evolution of the technique. J Endourol 13:177–180PubMedCrossRef Goh M, Wolf JS Jr (1999) Almost totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: further evolution of the technique. J Endourol 13:177–180PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Jamison RN (1993) Clinical measurement of pain. In: Ferrante FM, VadeBoncouer TR (eds) Postoperative pain management. Churchill Livingstone, New York, pp 689–693 Jamison RN (1993) Clinical measurement of pain. In: Ferrante FM, VadeBoncouer TR (eds) Postoperative pain management. Churchill Livingstone, New York, pp 689–693
14.
go back to reference Winfield HN, Weyman P, Clayman RV (1986) Percutaneous nephrostolithotomy: complications of premature nephrostomy tube removal. J Urol 136:77–79PubMed Winfield HN, Weyman P, Clayman RV (1986) Percutaneous nephrostolithotomy: complications of premature nephrostomy tube removal. J Urol 136:77–79PubMed
18.
go back to reference Stoller ML, Wolf JS, Lezin AST (1994) Estimated blood loss and transfusion rates associated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Urol 152:1977–1981PubMed Stoller ML, Wolf JS, Lezin AST (1994) Estimated blood loss and transfusion rates associated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Urol 152:1977–1981PubMed
22.
go back to reference Giusti G, Piccinelli et al (2007) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: tubeless or not tubeless? Abstract # 1456, Suppl J Urol; abstract book of 2007 AUA annual meeting (Anaheim, CA) Giusti G, Piccinelli et al (2007) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: tubeless or not tubeless? Abstract # 1456, Suppl J Urol; abstract book of 2007 AUA annual meeting (Anaheim, CA)
Metadata
Title
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: tubeless or not tubeless?
Authors
Guido Giusti
Alessandro Piccinelli
Orazio Maugeri
Alessio Benetti
Gianluigi Taverna
Pierpaolo Graziotti
Publication date
01-06-2009
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Urolithiasis / Issue 3/2009
Print ISSN: 2194-7228
Electronic ISSN: 2194-7236
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-009-0183-7

Other articles of this Issue 3/2009

Urolithiasis 3/2009 Go to the issue