Abstract
Introduction PCNL is a minimally invasive technique for treatment of renal and upper ureteral stones and has gone modifications like tubeless, total tubeless, mini and ultra mini PCNL.Objective To compare efficacy, safety and outcome of tubeless PCNL with standard PCNL.Methodology The study was conducted from January 2017 to December 2017 involving 50 patients undergoing PCNL randomized into standard PCNL group (S group) and tubeless PCNL group (T group) each arm containing 25 patients. Patients with congenital renal anomalies, solitary functioning kidney, previous renal surgery, clinically significant residual stones/fragments, perforation of pelvi-calyceal system and requiring conversion were excluded. Data analyzed using SPSS 20, chi-square test and Student's t test was used where appropriate. A p-value of <0.05 was considered significant.Results Mean age, mean stone size, preoperative hemoglobin level and creatinine level in group S and T were comparable. Similarly postoperative hemoglobin level and creatinine level in groups S and T were comparable. The mean operating time in group S was 99.38± 16.24min and 89.38 ± 12.27min in group T ( p=0.02). Postoperatively, VAS in group S was 5.25± 0.94 and 2.88± 1.68 in group T ( p<0.001). Complication occurred in 9 patients in S group as postoperative anemia (hemoglobin <10gram/dl)-3 cases, superficial surgical site infecon-4 and urine leak-2 while it was seen in 3 patients in T group as stoma site hematoma-2 and anemia-1 (p= 0.04). Three patients in group S and 1 patient in group T respectively required transfusion (p= 0.82). Postoperative analgesic requirement in S and T groups were 13.08± 2.39 and 9.03± 2.44 grams of paracetamol respectively ( p<0.001). The hospital stay was 3.79± 0.58 days in S group and 2.54 ± 0.50 days in T group (p<0.001).Conclusion Tubeless PCNL is a safe option in selected cases. It is associated with significantly less postoperative pain, analgesic requirement, postoperative complication and shorter duration of hospital stay minimizing treatment cost.BJHS 2018;3(1)5 : 366 - 369
Highlights
Nephrolithiasis is a common condi on affec ng about 10% of the popula on. 1 The incidence and prevalence of stone disease has been increasing over me around the world.[2]
The study was conducted from January 2017 to December 2017 involving 50 pa ents undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) randomized into standard PCNL group (S group) and tubeless PCNL group (T group) each arm containing 25 pa ents
Complica ons occurred in 9 pa ents in S group as postopera ve anemia-3 cases, superficial surgical site infec on-4 and urine leak-2 while it was seen in 3 pa ents in T group as stoma site hematoma-2 and anemia-1( p= 0.04)
Summary
Nephrolithiasis is a common condi on affec ng about 10% of the popula on. 1 The incidence and prevalence of stone disease has been increasing over me around the world.[2]. 1 The incidence and prevalence of stone disease has been increasing over me around the world.[2] About 70% of the pa ents affected by nephrolithiasis experience recurrence.[1] Various treatment modali es are available for the renal stones which include medical management, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), open renal surgery and laparoscopic or robo c surgery. Since its first descrip on in 1976 by Fernströmand Johansson, PCNL has developed into a mainstream urologic approach for management of large renal stones.[3,4]. Tubeless PCNL was developed as an alterna ve method to decrease complica ons associated with standard PCNL.[5,6] In tubeless PCNL, no nephrostomy tube is inserted.[7] The aim of this study was to compare outcome of standard andtubeless PCNL
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
