Korean J Urol.  2012 Nov;53(11):785-789.

Comparative Study between Standard and Totally Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy

• Yun SI
• Lee YH
• Kim JS
• Cho SR
• Kim BS
• Kwon JB

Abstract

PURPOSE
Several recent studies have reported the benefits of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL). Postoperatively, tubeless PNL patients have an indwelling ureteral stent placed, which is often associated with stent-related morbidity. We have performed totally tubeless (tubeless and stentless) PNL in which no nephrostomy tube or ureteral stent is placed postoperatively. We evaluated the safety, effectiveness, and feasibility of totally tubeless PNL.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
From March 2008 to February 2012, 57 selected patients underwent standard or totally tubeless PNL. Neither a nephrostomy tube nor a ureteral stent was placed in the totally tubeless PNL group. We compared patient and stone characteristics, operation time, length of hospitalization, analgesia requirements, stone-free rate, blood loss, change in creatinine, and perioperative complications between the standard and totally tubeless PNL groups.
RESULTS
There were no significant differences in preoperative patient characteristics, postoperative complications, or the stone-free rate between the two groups, but the totally tubeless PNL group showed a shorter hospitalization and a lesser analgesic requirement compared with the standard PNL group. Blood loss and change in creatinine were not significantly different between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Totally tubeless PNL appears to be a safe and effective alternative for the management of renal stone patients and is associated with a decrease in length of hospital stay.

Keyword

Kidney calculi; Percutaneous nephrostomy; Stents

MeSH Terms

Analgesia
Creatinine
Hospitalization
Humans
Kidney Calculi
Length of Stay
Nephrostomy, Percutaneous
Postoperative Complications
Stents
Ureter
Creatinine

Reference

1. Feng MI, Tamaddon K, Mikhail A, Kaptein JS, Bellman GC. Prospective randomized study of various techniques of percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Urology. 2001. 58:345–350.

2. Shah HN, Kausik V, Hedge S, Shah JN, Bansal MB. Initial experience with hemostatic fibrin glue as adjuvant during tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol. 2006. 20:194–198.

3. Schick V. Sealing of percutaneous nephrolithotomy access after complete stone removal with a hemostyptic gelatin powder (Spongostan). Aktuelle Urol. 2006. 37:52–57.

4. Yu DS. Gelatin packing of intracortical tract after percutaneous nephrostomy lithotripsy for decreasing bleeding and urine leakage. J Chin Med Assoc. 2006. 69:162–165.

5. Singh I, Kumar A, Kumar P. "Ambulatory PCNL" (tubeless PCNL under regional anesthesia) -- a preliminary report of 10 cases. Int Urol Nephrol. 2005. 37:35–37.

6. Bellman GC, Davidoff R, Candela J, Gerspach J, Kurtz S, Stout L. Tubeless percutaneous renal surgery. J Urol. 1997. 157:1578–1582.

7. Kwon S, Kim HG. A comparative study between standard and tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Korean J Urol. 2007. 48:45–48.

8. Crook TJ, Lockyer CR, Keoghane SR, Walmsley BH. Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol. 2008. 22:267–271.

9. Aghamir SM, Hosseini SR, Gooran S. Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol. 2004. 18:647–648.

10. Aghamir SM, Mohammadi A, Mosavibahar SH, Meysamie AP. Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy in renal anomalies. J Endourol. 2008. 22:2131–2134.

11. Istanbulluoglu OM, Ozturk B, Cicek T, Gonen M, Ozkardes H. Case report: bilateral simultaneous tubeless and stentless percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol. 2008. 22:25–28.

12. Wickham JE, Miller RA, Kellett MJ, Payne SR. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: one stage or two? Br J Urol. 1984. 56:582–585.

13. Karami H, Gholamrezaie HR. Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy in selected patients. J Endourol. 2004. 18:475–476.

14. Crook TJ, Lockyer CR, Keoghane SR, Walmsley BH. A randomized controlled trial of nephrostomy placement versus tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Urol. 2008. 180:612–614.

15. Zilberman DE, Lipkin ME, de la Rosette JJ, Ferrandino MN, Mamoulakis C, Laguna MP, et al. Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: the new standard of care? J Urol. 2010. 184:1261–1266.

16. Istanbulluoglu MO, Cicek T, Ozturk B, Gonen M, Ozkardes H. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: nephrostomy or tubeless or totally tubeless? Urology. 2010. 75:1043–1046.

17. Pryor JL, Jenkins AD. Use of double-pigtail stents in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol. 1990. 143:475–478.

18. McCullough TC, Roth JV, Ginsberg PC, Harkaway RC. Estimated blood loss underestimates calculated blood loss during radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urol Int. 2004. 72:13–16.

19. Tiselius HG, Ackermann D, Alken P, Buck C, Conort P, Gallucci M, et al. Guidelines on urolithiasis. Eur Urol. 2001. 40:362–371.

20. Stables DP, Ginsberg NJ, Johnson ML. Percutaneous nephrostomy: a series and review of the literature. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1978. 130:75–82.

21. Alken P, Hutschenreiter G, Gunther R, Marberger M. Percutaneous stone manipulation. J Urol. 1981. 125:463–466.

22. Joseph WS. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: technique, indication and complication. AUA Update Ser. 1993. 12:154–159.

23. Kader AK, Finelli A, Honey RJ. Nephroureterostomy-drained percutaneous nephrolithotomy: modification combining safety with decreased morbidity. J Endourol. 2004. 18:29–32.

24. Bdesha AS, Jones CR, North EA, Pinfield J, Boyd PJ. Routine placement of nephrostomy tube is not nessary after pertutaneous nephrolithotomy. Br J Urol. 1997. 79:Suppl 4. 1.