Are Nephrostomy and Ureteral Stent Necessary after Multi-Access Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy?

INTRODUCTION: Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is a well-established technique used in single -access procedure nevertheless these results challenge the multi-access PCNL as a contra-indication to application of this technique. AIMS: To compare complication rates and safety of use of this technique after multi-access PCNL. METHODS: A Total of 130 patients with renal stones were enrolled in this cohort study. Totally tubeless PCNL with single access (Group A, n = 70) and multi-access (Group B, n = 60) were done and bleedings were assessed by measuring hemoglobin (Hb) drop, blood transfusion rate and need for angioembolization besides leakage rates which were also recorded. RESULTS: In the 130 patients who underwent totally tubeless PCNL, no leakage from puncture site nor angioembolization cases were identified. There was no significant statistical differences between 2 groups regarding Hb drop (1.91 in single access versus 2.20 in multi-access), transfusion rate and length of hospital stay (p > 0.05). Stone-free rate was increased from 91% in single access to 97% in multi access by adding percutaneous access sites (from 91% in single access to 97% in multi-access). CONCLUSIONS: Multi-access totally tubeless PCNL seems feasible and has comparable complication rates including Hb drop besides providing the advantage of higher stone-free rates using multi-access tracts.

A non-inferiority study to analyze the safety of totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

BACKGROUND: Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (ttPCNL) becomes increasingly frequently utilized in the treatment of kidney stones. This procedure emerged as an answer for patients' needs to minimize hospitalization time, pain intensity and discomfort due to nephrostomy tube. However, ttPCNL may be less safe for patients, as without nephrostomy tube bleeding from renal vessels is potentially more severe. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of our study was to retrospectively evaluate the safety parameters of ttPCNL collected in a prospective manner. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a single tertiary care center, non-inferiority study with 2 arms (55 patients in each arm). The 1st group consisted of patients who underwent ttPCNL with the application of TachoSil® (Takeda, Osaka, Japan) as sealing material, while in the 2nd group, conventional PCNL with nephrostomy tube (cPCNL) was utilized. The primary goal was to prove that hemoglobin drop after surgery, as equivalent of safety, was not inferior than 1 g/dL. The secondary endpoints comprised visual analogue scale (VAS) of pain, additional pain treatment and hospital stay. RESULTS: The mean hemoglobin drop after ttPCNL was insignificantly lower in comparison with cPCNL group (mean: -0.35 g/dL; confidence interval (CI) = -0.8, 0.21). Visual analogue scale of pain and pain treatment were comparable between groups. Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the ttPCNL group. CONCLUSIONS: Totally tubeless PCNL can be considered a safe option after uncomplicated lithotripsy - what is important, it is characterized by a shorter hospitalization time. Postoperatively, pain intensity is comparable between both groups.

Comparison of totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for kidney stones: a randomized, clinical trial

This study aimed to compare the totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy techniques regarding their rates of success and complications in patients with kidney stones. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups. Forty-four patients (24 men; mean age: 50.40±2.02 years) received totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL; no nephrostomy catheter or ureteral catheter after PCNL) and 40 patients (18 men; mean age: 49.95±13.38 years) underwent standard PCNL (a nephrostomy catheter and ureteral catheter were used after PCNL). All surgeries were performed by one surgeon. Postoperative changes in hemoglobin, the blood transfusion rate, changes in creatinine levels, operation time, analgesic need, hospitalization time, and complication rate were compared between the groups. No significant differences were observed in age, gender, stone size, and surgery side between the groups (P<0.05). The operation time was significantly lower in the totally tubeless PCNL group than in the standard PCNL group (P=0.005). Pethidine requirements were significantly higher in the standard PCNL group than the totally tubeless PCNL group (P=0.007). Hospitalization time was significantly higher in the standard PCNL group than in the totally tubeless PCNL group (P<0.0001). The complication rate was 15% in the standard PCNL group and 9.1% in the totally tubeless PCNL group (P=0.73). The totally tubeless PCNL technique is safe and effective, even for patients with staghorn stones. This technique is associated with decreased pain, analgesic needs, and operative and hospitalization time. We believe that a normal peristaltic ureter is the best drainage tube.

Comparison of complications associated with standard and totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy according to modified Clavien grading: a multicenter retrospective study.

The aim of this study was to compare the complications of standard and totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) based on the modified Clavien complication grading system. We retrospectively evaluated the complications of 290 consecutive patients who had undergone standard or totally tubeless PCNL at four institutes between January 2010 and August 2012 based on the modified Clavien scale. The totally tubeless cases were classified as Group 1 and the cases to which a Malecot re-entry catheter was applied were classified as Group 2. The postoperative complications were recorded according to the modified Clavien complication grading system. Statistically significant differences were observed only in the first-degree injury class between the two groups based on the modified Clavien classification. The requirement for blood transfusion and prolonged percutaneous access site leakage were more frequent in Group 2, but these differences were not statistically significant. We also performed a pain evaluation by monitoring postoperative analgesia demands. In Group 1, the analgesic demand rates in the 1(st) and 6(th) postoperative hours were 64.6% and 31.5%, respectively. In Group 2, the analgesic demand rates were 87.5% and 58.75% in the 1(st) and 6(th) postoperative hours, respectively. The mean ± standard deviation of analgesic doses in the first 6 hours was 0.96 ± 0.7 and 1.46 ± 0.6 in Groups 1 and 2, respectively. These differences were statistically significant. Based on our results, we can conclude that the tubeless technique has fewer complications, improved postoperative patient comfort, shorter hospitalization times, and a reduced need for analgesics, suggesting that tubeless PCNL should be the standard approach. For suitable cases, this technique may be used safely as the standard PCNL approach.