Safety Of Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Research Articles

Prospective randomized study comparing safety and efficacy of standard versus tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Objective:To prospectively compare the feasibility and safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) Vs standard PCNL. Patients and methods:220 patients undergoing PCNL were randomized to two groups: Group A (tubeless PCNL) with antegrade placement of a Double-J stent without nephrostomy and group B (standard PCNL) with nephrostomy tube placement postoperatively with 110 patients in each group.Inclusion criteria were stone size more than 2 cm, single tract puncture with complete clearance, less than three stones with a diameter Results:There was no significant difference between the two groups for patient demographics and stone characteristics. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups for the complications, stone clearance, need for ancillary procedure, mean postoperative drop in haemoglobin, need for blood transfusion. The mean postoperative ana;gesic requirement, operative time and hospital stay was statistically significantly higher in the tubeless PCNL group compared with the standard PCNL group with p values of 0.000, 0.040, 0.001 respectively. Conclusion:Tubeless PCNL is considered a safe and efficient technique in any tract location (upper, middle, lower), in patients with bilateral disease and effective procedure if done in a selected group of patients.

674 - Improving the safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy by plasmakinetic hemostasis

674 - Improving the safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy by plasmakinetic hemostasis

Tubeless versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: an update meta-analysis

BackgroundTo update a previously published systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).MethodsA systematic literature search of EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library was performed to confirm relevant studies. The scientific literature was screened in accordance with the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. After quality assessment and data extraction from the eligible studies, a meta-analysis was conducted using Stata SE 12.0.ResultsFourteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 1148 patients were included. Combined results demonstrated that tubeless PCNL was significantly associated with shorter operative time (weighted mean difference [WMD], −3.79 min; 95% confidence interval [CI], −6.73 to −0.85; P = 0.012; I2 = 53.8%), shorter hospital stay (WMD, −1.27 days; 95% CI, −1.65 to −0.90; P < 0.001; I2 = 98.7%), faster time to return to normal activity (WMD, −4.24 days; 95% CI, −5.76 to −2.71; P < 0.001; I2 = 97.5%), lower postoperative pain scores (WMD, −16.55 mm; 95% CI, −21.60 to −11.50; P < 0.001; I2 = 95.7%), less postoperative analgesia requirements (standard mean difference, −1.09 mg; 95% CI, −1.35 to −0.84; P < 0.001; I2 = 46.8%), and lower urine leakage (Relative risk [RR], 0.30; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.59; P = 0.001; I2 = 41.2%). There were no significant differences in postoperative hemoglobin reduction (WMD, −0.02 g/dL; 95% CI, −0.04 to 0.01; P = 0.172; I2 = 41.5%), stone-free rate (RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.05; P = 0.776; I2 = 0.0%), postoperative fever rate (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.93; P = 0.867; I2 = 0.0%), or blood transfusion rate (RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.36 to 1.70; P = 0.538; I2 = 0.0%). The results of subgroup analysis were consistent with the overall findings. The sensitivity analysis indicated that most results remained constant when total tubeless or partial tubeless or mini-PCNL studies were excluded respectively.ConclusionsTubeless PCNL is an available and safe option in carefully evaluated and selected patients. It is significantly associated with the advantages of shorter hospital stay, shorter time to return to normal activity, lower postoperative pain scores, less analgesia requirement, and reduced urine leakage.

Use of hemostatic sealant in tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: Experience of a single institution from Taiwan

ObjectiveTubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) offers several advantages over standard PCNL, including a shorter hospital stay, less analgesic requirement, and less postoperative pain. Using a fibrin sealant to seal the nephrostomy tract had become a widely accepted technique at the conclusion of tubeless PCNL. Our objective is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tubeless PCNL using hemostatic matrix. Materials and methodsThis is a retrospective review of PCNL database at our hospital between June 2014 and March 2016. During this period, a total of 139 PCNLs were performed, including 41 with tubeless technique with adjunct of hemostatic matrix (Floseal; Baxter, Deerfield, IL, USA) at the conclusion of the PCNL procedure. The standard PCNL group and the tubeless PCNL group were compared in terms of demographic characteristics, perioperative data, stone characteristics, and complication rate. ResultsOf all 123 patients included in this study, 41 underwent tubeless PCNL. Demographic data of the two groups were comparable except for a higher proportion of male patients in the tubeless PCNL group (73.2% vs. 53.7%). Stone characteristics were also comparable in the two groups. Perioperative variables, including operative time, drop of serum hemoglobin level, and perioperative complication rate, revealed no statistical difference between the two groups. Tubeless PCNL was associated with less postoperative pain, less analgesic requirement, and a shorter hospital stay (p < 0.01). ConclusionTubeless PCNL with adjunct use of a hemostatic sealant can be considered as a safe treatment option for renal calculi with favorable outcome, without an increase in complications. Compared with standard PCNL, tubeless PCNL with hemostatic sealant use is associated with less pain, use of fewer narcotic agents, and a shorter hospital stay.

Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Can be a Choice, Why Not?

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) has been widely accepted and is commonly used to treat renal calculi. The optimal drainage of kidney after PCNL has not been clearly determined yet. Placement of an 18F to 24F nephrostomy tube at the end of the procedure is accepted as standard of care to date. The main advantages are adequate renal drainage, hemostatic tamponade and providing renal access for second look PCNL. However, based on the concept that the purpose of the tube is only to maintain adequate drainage of the kidney, a “tubeless” approach has been developed by placing a ureteral stent or catheter to provide drainage after PCNL instead of a nephrostomy tube. Tubeless PCNL is an effective and safe procedure for treatment of renal stones in selected cases. This procedure can even be chosen for patients with previous renal surgery, and hemorrhagic tendency. By using this method, less postoperative pain and a shorter hospital stay can be achieved, when compared with conventional PCNL. There is a controversy over ideal drainage system after PCNL in recent years. Herein, we made a systematic review for efficacy and safety of tubeless PCNL, totally tubeless PCNL, discussed different variations and compared the outcomes of this technique with standart PCNL.

Tubeless procedure reduces hospitalization and pain after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: results of a multivariable analysis

The objective of the study was to assess the efficacy and safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (t-PCNL) in comparison with standard PCNL (s-PCNL). We retrospectively evaluated 317 consecutive PCNL and compared perioperative results, time of hospitalization and analgesic requirement of t-PCNL (114; 36.0%) to s-PCNL (203; 64.0%). The decision to perform a tubeless PCNL was made at the end of the procedures depending on the surgeon's preference and according to the following inclusion criteria: (a) no serious bleeding or perforation in the collecting system during the procedure; (b) patients with no more than one access; and (c) residual stone burden needing a second-stage nephroscopy. Staghorn stones and anatomic anomalies were not considered as exclusion criteria for t-PCNL. Univariate analyses were conducted with one-way ANOVA, Fisher's exact test, Pearson's Chi-square and linear-by-linear association test as appropriate. Stepwise multivariable regression analyses were used to assess the independent correlation between demographics and clinical variables and the clinical outcomes. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of stone-free rate, hemoglobin decrease, blood transfusion and complication rate. Mean hospital stay was significantly shorter in the t-PCNL group (3.3 vs. 4.6days; P<0.001). Tubeless PCNL was associated with less analgesia requirement (68.4 vs. 86.7%; P<0.001) and with lower analgesic dose requirement (1.6 vs. 2.1 mean doses; P=0.010). Multivariable analyses showed that t-PCNL (P<0.001), postoperative fever (P<0.001), transfusions (P<0.001), operative time (P=0.002), postoperative hydronephrosis (P=0.005) and residual fragment dimension (P=0.024) were independently correlated with duration of hospitalization, while analgesic dose requirement was independently influenced by hemoglobin decrease (P<0.001), t-PCNL (P=0.005) and stone number (P=0.044). Our study confirmed that t-PCNL has similar outcomes to s-PCNL in terms of stone-free rate without increasing complications in selected cases. t-PCNL is a factor independently associated with shorter hospitalization and lower analgesic requirement.

Immediate postoperative morbidity in patients with indwelling double-J stent versus overnight-externalized ureteral catheter after tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a prospective, randomized study

The conventional technique for percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) ends by placing a nephrostomy tube within the access tract. However, feasibility and safety of tubeless PNL have been widely demonstrated. In this modification, a ureteral stent is usually left in place instead of the nephrostomy tube. The aim of this study is to compare the use of a postoperative indwelling double-J stent versus an overnight-externalized ureteral catheter in patients undergoing tubeless PNL. Sixty-eight patients undergoing tubeless PNL were randomized either for a postoperative double-J stent (group 1) or for an overnight-externalized ureteral catheter (group 2). Outcomes evaluated included postoperative pain, hospital stay length, incidence of hemorrhagic complications, residual lithiasis and urinary leakage. Groups were similar according to age, sex, body mass index and stone burden. There were no significant differences in terms of postoperative pain, incidence of perirenal hematomas, residual lithiasis and urinary leakage. However, patients in group 1 presented longer hospital stays (3.7±1.7 vs. 1.9±0.3days; p<0.001) and greater hematocrit drops (4.9±2.2 vs. 2.1±1.8%; p<0.001). Our results confirm that among patients undergoing tubeless PNL, both alternatives (i.e. leaving a double-J stent or an overnight-externalized ureteral catheter) are reliable and safe. However, further considerations, like the need of double-J stent removal under cystoscopy, need to be taken into account when deciding which modality to use.

Supracostal Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study

To evaluate the safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients undergoing supracostal percutaneous renal access. Between October 1999 and October 2010, 302 patients underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy via a supracostal access tract. Two hundred forty-eight (82.1%) patients had a nephrostomy tube placed at the end of the case and 54 (17.9%) did not. The medical records of both cohorts were compared regarding patient demographics (age, sex, body mass index, preoperative creatinine level), operative characteristics (estimated blood loss, length of stay, treatment efficacy), and complication rates (overall, thoracic, hemorrhage necessitating transfusion). Patient demographics did not differ between the tubeless and nephrostomy tube groups. Estimated blood loss was significantly less in the tubeless patients (67 mL vs 123 mL; P=0.019). The tubeless group had a shorter mean length of stay than the nephrostomy tube group (2.5 vs 3.4 days, P<0.01). Treatment success was comparable between the two groups (tubeless 81.5% vs nephrostomy tube 77.8%; P=0.553). Overall complication (P=0.765) and blood transfusion (P=0.064) rates were equivalent. Chest complications were higher in the tubeless group (22.2%) compared with the nephrostomy tube patients (10.9%) (P=0.024). Nevertheless, chest complications necessitating intervention were not different (P=0.152). Tubeless supracostal percutaneous nephrolithotomy was associated with less intraoperative blood loss and a shorter hospital stay. Although the tubeless group experienced more chest complications overall, the need for intervention was no different among the two cohorts. Tubeless supracostal percutaneous nephrolithotomy appears safe.

Postoperative morbidity of tubeless versus conventional percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a prospective comparative study

Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PNL) is an established technique for the treatment of renal calculi. Some reports have challenged the need for a nephrostomy tube at the end of the procedure, arguing that it accounts for a longer hospital stay and increased postoperative pain. During the last years, several series have addressed the feasibility and safety of tubeless PNL, where a double-J ureteral stent is left in place after the end of intervention instead of a nephrostomy tube. The aim of our study was to compare conventional versus tubeless PNL in terms of postoperative morbidity. Eighty-five patients who underwent PNL at a single center met the inclusion criteria (complete intraoperative stone clearance, no evidence of active intraoperative bleeding, single percutaneous access, and operative time shorter than 2 h) and were randomized at the end of the procedure to have placed either a nephrostomy tube (group 1) or a double-J ureteral stent (group 2). Outcomes assessed were postoperative pain, bleeding complications, leakage complications, and length of hospital stay. The patients in the tubeless group had a shorter hospital stay (3.7 vs. 5.8 days; P < 0.001), and less postoperative pain at postoperative days 2 and 3 (P < 0.001). No significant difference in bleeding or leakage complications was observed. This study supports the feasibility and safety of tubeless PNL in a selected group of the patients, suggesting some intraoperative criteria to be considered when performing it. However, further controlled studies will have to determine its impact on stone-free rates prior to be considered the standard technique in these selected cases.

Safety and efficacy of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients on anti-platelet therapy and cirrhotic patients

Without the temponade effect over nephrostomy tube, postoperative hemorrhage is a major concern to the safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in patients with bleeding tendency. In this study, we would like to report our experience of performing tubeless PCNLs in these patients. At the end of PCNL, we cauterized the bleeding points in access tract for hemostasis to facilitate the achievement of tubeless PCNL. We identified and reviewed 16 patients under antiplatelet agent therapy and 6 patients with liver cirrhosis from 598 tubeless PCNLs performed in a single institute. Among the 16 patients undergoing anti-platelet therapy, the average stone size was 2.8 cm. The average operation time was 84.7 min. The stone-free rate was 87.5%. The average postoperative hospital stay was 3.8 days. Two patients (12.5%) experienced urinary tract infections after operation. There was no uncontrolled hemorrhage during and after operation and only one patient needed postoperative blood transfusion. No patient experienced any thromboembolic complication. Of the six patients with liver cirrhosis, the average stone size was 3.3 cm. The average operation time was 77.5 min. The stone-free rate is 83.4%. The average postoperative hospital stay was 4.0 days. No patient received blood transfusion after operation. There was no patient experiencing urinary tract infection after operation. Our results suggest that with careful hemostasis, tubeless PCNL is a safety modality in the treatment of urinary stone disease in patients on chronic anti-platelet therapy and cirrhotic patients.

The efficacy and safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tubeless versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Relevant randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials studies were identified from electronic database (Cochrane CENTRAL, Medline and EMBASE et al.). The retrieval time ended in August 2010. The quality of the included trials was assessed and the data were extracted independently by two reviewers. We divided the participants who received standard PCNL into two subgroups: small tube (4-10 F) group and big tube (14-24 F) group to reduce heterogeneity and bias. Efficacy (hospital stay time, operative time, stone-free rate) and safety (postoperative pain and analgesia requirement, postoperative fever, blood transfusion, urine leakage) were explored by using review manager v5.0. Fourteen randomized controlled trials comprising 776 subjects met the inclusion criteria. Our meta-analysis showed that there were statistically significant differences in hospital stay, postoperative analgesic requirement and urine leakage between tubeless and standard PCNL. In operative time, significant difference was found between tubeless and big tube group. No statistically significant differences were found in stone-free rate, postoperative fever, and blood transfusion between tubeless and standard PCNL. In conclusion, Tubeless PCNL was an effective and safe procedure for treatment of renal stones in selected patients, with shorter hospital stay, less analgesic requirement, lower urine leakage and without increased complications. Patients can receive great benefit from tubeless PCNL and it will become more palatable to patients as well as more cost-effective than standard PCNL in the future.

Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy is Associated With Less Pain and Shorter Hospitalization Compared with Standard or Small Bore Drainage: A Meta-analysis of Randomized, Controlled Trials

To assess the efficacy and safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) compared with standard or small-bore PCNL with a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. All eligible studies were searched on MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases. Risk ratio (RR), mean difference, or standardized mean difference (SMD), with its 95% CI, was used to evaluate the size effect. Ten and 3 trials were identified for comparison I (tubeless PCNL vs standard PCNL, 320 cases and 323 controls) and comparison II (tubeless PCNL vs small-bore PCNL, 55 cases and 54 controls), respectively. Tubeless PCNL required significantly less analgesia relative to standard PCNL (SMD -1.72; 95% CI -2.30 to 1.13; P(heterogeneity) = 0.04) and small-pore PCNL (SMD -0.69; 95% CI -1.13 to 2.05; P(heterogeneity) = 0.94). Furthermore, there was a remarkably shorter hospital stay in comparison I (SMD -1.35; 95% CI -1.40 to 1.30; P(heterogeneity) = 0.60) and comparison II (SMD -0.49; 95% CI -0.76 to 0.21; P(heterogeneity) = 0.15). The return to normal activity days was also significantly decreased in comparison I (SMD -4.34; 95% CI -6.28 to 2.41; P(heterogeneity) = 0.02). However, no significant difference was observed in the analyses concerning stone-free blood transfusion and complications rate in both comparisons. In subgroup analyses by nephrostomy diameter (22-Fr) and drainage methods, most results were consistent with the overall findings except for that to evaluate the operative time in the double-J stent subgroup. Tubeless PCNL is associated with less pain and quicker recovery compared with standard or small-bore PCNL, in the management of uncomplicated renal calculi.

Tubeless Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Infants and Preschool Children: A Preliminary Report

We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of tubeless mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in infants and preschool children, and compared them with age matched controls who underwent nephrostomy drainage. A total of 28 renal units in 26 children were operated on for stone disease using the mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy technique. Holmium laser and pneumatic lithotriptor were used for stone fragmentation. Children who underwent complete stone removal and had a clear nephrostomy tract only had a ureteral catheter placed. Those with residual stones or bleeding from the nephrostomy tract underwent nephrostomy drainage. We compared both groups with regard to patient and stone characteristics, and postoperative findings. A total of 12 renal units had only a ureteral catheter for diversion, while 16 had nephrostomy drainage. Mean respective ages of the stentless and nephrostomy groups were 3 (range 0.58 to 6) and 3.3 years (1.5 to 6). Mean respective stone burdens were 192 (range 100 to 400) and 416 (775 to 1,380) mm2. Surgery and fluoroscopy times were shorter in the tubeless group. Complication rates were higher (6 of 14 vs 0 of 12) and duration of hospitalization was longer (4.9 [range 3 to 14] vs 3.1 days [2 to 6]) in the nephrostomy group. Stone-free rates were 91.6% in the tubeless and 78.5% in the nephrostomy groups. Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy was observed to be a safe option for selected children with stone disease. The success and safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy depends on patient selection criteria, including low volume and infection-free stones that are removed completely without any bleeding from the access tract.

Does Previous Open Nephrolithotomy Affect the Efficacy and Safety of Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy?

Introduction: Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in selected patients is effective and results in less postoperative discomfort without increasing complications. The challenges of PCNL in patients who had a history of open nephrolithotomy are decreased kidney mobility due to scarring around the kidney and distortion of the renal collecting system, conditions that may cause difficulty of tract access and increase retained stone and hemorrhagic complications. We compared the efficacy and safety of the tubeless versus the standard PCNL in patients who had undergone previous open nephrolithotomy. Patients and Methods: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) was performed in 104 patients who had a history of previous open nephrolithotomy, of which 45 received tubeless PCNL (group I) and 59 received standard PCNL with routine postoperative nephrostomy tubes (group II). All patients had only one percutaneous renal access and showed no significant bleeding, extravasation or residual stone. Of group I, PCNL was done by the standard technique with only placement of a postoperative external ureteral catheter for 48 h. The success rate, operative time, hospital stay and complications were compared between the two groups. Results: Patient’s demographic data were not different between both groups. Infundibular stenosis and ureteropelvic junction obstruction were found in 2 and 4 cases of groups I and II, respectively. The success rates, operative time and complication rates were not significantly different between both groups. Hospital stay was 3.53 and 5.39 days for groups I and II, respectively, which was significantly different. Average analgesic (meperidine) usage was significantly less in the tubeless group (39 ± 35 mg for group I and 75 ± 32 mg for group II). Conclusion: Tubeless PCNL in selected patients with previous open nephrolithotomy has a safe and effective advantage compared to standard PCNL as indicated by a decrease in length of hospital stay and analgesic usage.

Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Geriatric Patients

Aim: To evaluate the safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in geriatric patients. Materials and Method: This is a retrospective review of 401 patients who received tubeless PCNL in a single institute. Among these, 50 were performed in patients aged older than 70 years (group 1), while 351 were performed in the remaining younger patients (group 2). Results: There was no significant difference in stone size between the 2 groups (3.6 ± 1.9 vs. 3.5 ± 2.0 cm). The average operative time was similar in both groups (92.8 ± 34.5 vs. 86.6 ± 32.0 min). The stone-free rate in groups 1 and 2 was 68.0% (34/50) and 83.8% (294/351), respectively, which was statistically significantly different. The average postoperative hospital stay was longer in group 1 (4.6 ± 3.4 days) than in group 2 (3.9 ± 2.5 days), but the difference was not statistically significant. There was no significant difference in postoperative urinary tract infection rate and blood transfusion rate in both groups (urinary tract infection: 18.0 vs. 8.8%; blood transfusion: 4 vs. 2.6%). Two patients in group 1 and 3 patients in group 2 experienced pulmonary complications. There was no other severe complication. Conclusion: Tubeless PCNL is a safe procedure for the treatment of geriatric patients with urolithiasis.

Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Staghorn Stones

To assess the outcome and safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) to treat patients with staghorn stones. Between March 2006 and March 2007, 75 patients underwent 82 PCNLs at our hospital. Of that total, 42 procedures were done without a nephrostomy tube (tubeless group) and 40 procedures were done with insertion of a nephrostomy tube at the end of the procedure (standard group). The mean age was 41.55 +/- 15.15 years and 50.29 +/- 9.42 years in the tubeless group and the standard group, respectively. Seven patients had bilateral stones. None of our patients had organ trauma or any other significant complication. The average operative time was shorter in the tubeless group than in the standard group (93.76 v 109.98 minutes, respectively; P = 0.03). The mean analgesic doses given postoperatively were 79.17 +/- 62.2 and 93.75 +/- 40.7 mg of meperidine in the tubeless group and the standard group, respectively, with no statistically significant difference. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 1.7 +/- 0.6 days in the tubeless group and 4 +/- 1.6 days in the standard group (P < 0.0001). The stone-free rate was 37 units (88.09%) and 35 units (87.5%) units in the tubeless and standard groups, respectively. Complications, operative time, and the length of hospitalization in selected patients undergoing tubeless PCNL were all lower than those seen in the standard group. Tubeless PCNL was thus found to be safe and effective, even in patients with staghorn stones.

POS-01.95: Safety and efficacy of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) is commonly used to treat patients with complex renal calculi. Placing a nephrostomy tube is the last step after completing PNL. Significant early postoperative discomfort after percutaneous procedure is usually secondary to nephrostomy tubes. The goal of this study is to evaluate the safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Safe Even in Supracostal Access

This study was designed to determine the outcome and safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in the treatment of renal calculi. Between November 2005 and March 2006, 48 patients were randomized to either an 18F Re-entry nephrostomy tube (group 1) or a 6F Double-J stent (group 2). The two groups were well matched for age, sex, stone size, stone laterality, and number of previous renal procedures. All PCNL procedures were performed by the same surgeon. Postoperative visual analog pain scale (VAS) scores at 8 and 24 hours and 14 days after surgery, in-hospital analgesic use, length of hospital stay, success rate, blood transfusion rate, and postoperative complications were compared for the two groups. The mean hospital stays in groups 1 and 2 were 3.1 and 1.6 days, respectively (P = 0.003). The mean VAS scores 8 and 24 hours after surgery were significantly lower in group 2 than in group 1 (P = 0.001). The postoperative analgesic requirement (diclofenac sodium) was significantly higher in group 1 (263 mg) than in group 2 (120 mg; P = 0.02). The rate of blood transfusion in the two groups was similar (P = NS). There was no difference between the groups in VAS scores on postoperative day 14. The number of supracostal accesses was significantly higher in group 2 than in group 1 (P = 0.02). The stone-free rates and the numbers of patients with insignificant residual fragments were similar in the two groups. There was no urine leakage or formation of urinoma in patients with Double-J stents. Tubeless PCNL is safe and effective even after supracostal access and is associated with less postoperative pain and a shorter hospital stay.

Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy—Should a Stent be an Integral Part?

We compared the outcome of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy with or without Double-J(R) stent. From January 2004 to March 2006 patients with renal stones matched for age and stone size who underwent tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy were prospectively evaluated in 2 groups treated by 2 surgeons. Group 1 had a Double-J stent and group 2 did not. Inclusion criteria for tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy included contralateral normal kidney, intact pelvicaliceal system, complete stone clearance under fluoroscopy and single infracostal puncture. These groups were compared for analgesic requirement, hospital stay, and intraoperative and postoperative complications. During a period of 27 months 52 patients (57 renal units) underwent tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Group 1 had 25 (28 renal units) and group 2 had 27 patients (29 renal units). Mean stone volume was 4.34 +/- 2.12 cm(3) in group 1 and 4.14 +/- 1.14 cm(3) in group 2. Mean pain score was 2.96 +/- 1.24 and 2.82 +/- 0.81 in groups 1 and 2, respectively. Analgesic (intramuscular or oral diclofenac sodium) requirement and mean hospital stay was comparable in groups 1 and 2, eg 170 +/- 110 vs 163.24 +/- 98.07 mg and 2.52 +/- 0.12 vs 2.35 +/- 0.12 days. Two patients in group 1 and 1 in group 2 had urinary leak from the percutaneous nephrolithotomy tract. Similarly 3 patients in group 1 had severe stent related problems and 1 required early removal of the Double-J stent. Avoiding use of the Double-J stent may not compromise the safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy.