Introduction: Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in selected patients has been found to be safe and can reduce postoperative discomfort without increasing complications. The challenges of tubeless PCNL via supracostal access are inadequate drainage and postoperative bleeding, conditions that may increase pulmonary complications. We compare the efficacy and safety of the tubeless supracostal versus the standard supracostal PCNL. Materials and Methods: Supracostal PCNL with one percutaneous renal access, no significant bleeding, extravasation and residual stone was performed in 95 patients. Of these, 43 were tubeless PCNL (Group-I) and 52 were PCNL with standard routine postoperative nephrostomy tube (Group-II). In group-I, PCNL was done by the standard supracostal technique with the placement of a postoperative external ureteral catheter for 48 hours. The operative time, success rate, hospital stay and ensuing complications were compared between group-I and group-II. Results: Patients in the tubeless PCNL group (Group-I) were 90.7% stone -free while those with standard routine postoperative nephrostomy tube(Group-II) were 84.6% stone -free. Additionally, stone fragments of less than 4 mm in diameter were found in 9.3% of patients in group-I and 25.4% in group-II. The success rate, hematocrit change and complication were not significantly different between both groups. The analgesic requirement, operative time and hospital stay were all significantly less in the tubeless supracostal group (Group-I). None of group I and only one patient of group II needed intercostal drainage. Conclusion: Tubeless supracostal percutaneous nephrolithotomy in selected patients is effective with acceptable complications. This technique offers the advantage of lower analgesic requirement, shorter operative time and hospital stay. The pulmonary complication is the same as the standard supracostal percutaneous nephrolithotomy.
BackgroundThe disadvantage of using total serum prostatic specific antigen (PSA) test for detection of prostate cancer is that it has a low specificity. The low specificity of total PSA (tPSA) test leads to unnecessary prostate biopsies. In this prospective study, we assessed the serum tPSA, free PSA, p2PSA, and the Prostate Health Index (PHI) in the detection of prostate cancer in men with a tPSA of 4–10 ng/mL and a negative digital rectal examination (DRE).Materials and methods101 male outpatients with a serum PSA of 4–10 ng/mL and nonsuspicious DRE for prostate cancer who underwent first transrectal ultrasound with a prostate biopsy were recruited. A blood sample to enable tPSA, free PSA, and p2PSA levels to be calculated was drawn before the prostate biopsy. The diagnosis and detection of high-grade cancer are correlated with the blood sample.ResultsSixteen patients were positive for prostate cancer. All had significantly higher serum 2pPSA and PHI levels than patients with no cancer. A PHI level at 90% sensitivity (cutoff of 34.14) demonstrated a higher area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and more specificity in diagnosis and detection of high-grade prostate cancer than other tests.ConclusionsThe PHI in men with a PSA level of 4–10 ng/mL with negative DRE increased specificity in the detection of prostate cancer. This test is useful in discriminating between patients with or without cancer and also enables the detection of high-grade cancer avoiding unnecessary biopsies.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.