ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Inserting a double J stent during kidney transplant has reduced the rate of urologic complications. Traditionally, a double J stent is removed via endoscopic intervention. Here, we assessed the safety and efficacy of a nonoperative method for double J stent removal. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our study group included 200 consecutive patients who underwent kidney transplant from January 2013 to April 2014. Group A consisted of 100 recipients who had a double J stent that was tied to a Foley catheter with 2-0 silk suture. The stent was simply removed by taking out the Foley catheter after 3 weeks. Patients in group A were compared with a second group of 100 kidney transplant patients whose stents were removed endoscopically 3 weeks later (group B). RESULTS: Patients were matched between the 2 groups regarding age distribution, male-to-female patient ratio, deceased versus living donor graft, prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus, and body mass index. The incidence of urinary fistula (3% in group A and 4% in group B; P = .7), ureteral stenosis (1% in group A and 2% in group B; P = .56), wound infection (1% in group A and 2% in group B; P = .56), and positive urine culture (20% in group A and 29% in group B; P = .14) after stent removal were not significantly different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that nonoperative removal of a double J stent is a safe and effective method. This approach is simple, and there is no need for a surgical procedure or any outpatient surgical intervention.
Subject(s)
Device Removal/methods , Endoscopy , Kidney Transplantation/instrumentation , Stents , Urologic Diseases/prevention & control , Adolescent , Adult , Catheters, Indwelling , Device Removal/adverse effects , Endoscopy/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Iran , Kidney Transplantation/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Prosthesis Design , Risk Factors , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , Urinary Catheterization/instrumentation , Urinary Catheters , Urologic Diseases/diagnosis , Urologic Diseases/etiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the results of transplantation from living unrelated donors (LURD) versus living related donors (LRD) with a long term follow-up of 25-30 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1984 to 2015, a total of3716 kidney transplantations (411 LRDs and 3305 LURDs) were enrolled to the study. Long-term survival of grafts and patients as well as the association between relation state and patients or grafts surveillance were the outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 3716 live donor kidney transplants (LRD, n = 411; LURD, n = 3305) were carried out over this period. The mean age of donors was 28 ± 54 years in the LURD group and 34.4 ± 11.7 years in LRD (P < . 001), while the mean age of the recipients was 35.6 ± 15.6 years and 27.6 ± 10.1 years for the two groups, respectively. Donor age was the only statistically significant predictor of graft survival rate (hazard ratio = 1.021, 95% confidence interval: 1.012-1.031). Between 1984 and 2015, patient survival and graft survival improved significantly also patient survival and graft survival was similar in LURDs compared with LRDs. CONCLUSION: It seems that the outcome of LURD and LRD is comparable in terms of patient and graft survival. Therefore, transplants from LURDs may be proposed as an acceptable management for patients with end stage renal disease.
