Title of article
Does Bleeding During Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Necessitate keeping the Nephrostomy Tube?A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
Author/Authors
Etemadian، Masoud نويسنده , , Soleimani، Mohammad Javad نويسنده , , Haghighi، Ramin نويسنده , , Zeighami، Mohammad Reza نويسنده , , Najimi، Neda نويسنده ,
Issue Information
فصلنامه با شماره پیاپی 29 سال 2011
Pages
6
From page
21
To page
26
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare outcomes in two groups of patients with kept and discarded nephrostomy tube after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) complicated with bleeding. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred patients who had undergone PCNL complicated with hemorrhage were recruited in this study. Patients were randomly allocated to two groups: group A, who underwent tubeless PCNL and tract port was packed for 3 to 4 minutes after removing Amplatz sheath, and group B, for whom a 24-F nephrostomy tube was left in place at the end of the procedure. Patients were followed up for 3 months to check if bleeding occurred. RESULTS: The mean operation time was 68 ± 4.3 minutes in group A and 74 ± 5.6 minutes in group B (P = .098). The mean stone size was similar in groups A and B (36.26 ± 5.3 mm versus 35.35 ± 5.85 mm; P = .613). The mean hemoglobin drop was 3.65 ± 1.20 g/dL in group A and 3.13 ± 1.06 g/dL in group B. There was no significant difference between the mean of stonefree rate in groups A and B (92.58% ± 5.97versus 89.60% ± 8.3; P = .210). Patients in group A experienced a significantly less duration of hospitalization than group B (2.42 ± 0.84 days versus 3.70 ± 0.80 days; P < .001). CONCLUSION: In the absence of clear indication, nephrostomy tube insertion after PCNL does not seem to be beneficial, and its removal does not posepatients at any additional risk.
Journal title
Urology Journal
Serial Year
2011
Journal title
Urology Journal
Record number
658740
Link To Document