The comparison of standard and tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures

Nalbant, İsmail; Öztürk, Ufuk; Şener, Nevzat Can; Dede, Onur; Bayraktar, Ahmet Murat; İmamoğlu, Abdurrahim

doi:10.1590/1677-553820133806795

Cited by 13 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[24] In the present study, time taken for procedure was statistically more in Group B as compared to Group A (pvalue < 0.0001). Contrary to the present study, Nalbant I et al [11] and Gupta NP et al [25] reported slightly longer operative time for standard PCNL as compared to tubeless PCNL, but there was no significant difference (p-value > 0.05). While, recent meta-analysis by Xun Y et al [16] reported that tubeless PCNL was significantly associated with shorter operative time (p-value = 0.012).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 95%

“…[6,18] Tubeless PCNL wherein only an internal ureteral stent is used, has been claimed to have less morbidity and early recovery when compared to a standard PCNL. [8,9,11,16] In the present study, there was no statistically significant difference between the study groups in terms of the age and gender of the patients, stone side (i.e., left or right) and location (i.e., ureter or opposite kidney), comorbidities such as hypertension and diabetes mellitus, and serum creatinine; thus minimising their effect on the outcomes of the procedures.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 53%

“…These studies have also demonstrated that the length of hospital stay, use of analgesics, pain profiles, and indirectly cost are significantly lower in patients undergoing the tubeless PCNL procedure. [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] In the present study, we aimed to prospectively compare the efficacy and safety of the standard and tubeless PCNL, with special focus on feasibility, operative time, postoperative pain, complications and length of hospital stay.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Efficacy and Safety of Standard Versus Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomya Randomized Controlled Study

Ramasamy¹,

Balasubramanyan²,

Thirunavukarasu³

et al. 2019

jemds

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND Nephrolithiasis is a common urological disorder. PCNL is indicated for renal calculi > 2 cm in size. We present a prospective study to assess the efficacy and safety of tubeless PCNL in comparison to standard PCNL. METHODS A randomized control trial study was conducted in Sri Rama Chandra Medical Centre, Chennai, over a period of 2 years (i.e., between February 2016 to March 2018). A total of 220 patients were divided equally into two groups and were randomised into: Group A (undergoing tubeless PCNL; n = 110) and Group B (undergoing standard PCNL; n = 110). Factors that were evaluated included operative time, hospital stay, drop in haemoglobin, blood transfusion required, analgesics required, ancillary procedure performed, stone clearance and complications. The qualitative variables were analysed by chi-square test and quantitative variables were analysed by the student's t test. A p-value <0.05 was considered as statistically significant. RESULTS There was no statistically significant difference between the two study groups for patient age, gender, stone location, associated stone disorders, and co-morbidities. Majority of the study participants were male i.e., 56.4 % in Group A and 55.5 % in Group B. The mean age in group A was 42.45 ± 14.13 years and in group B was 45.44 ± 12.12 years. There was statistically significant less operative time, less hospital stay, smaller drop in haemoglobin and less analgesic requirement in Group A (p-value < 0.0001) as compared to Group B. There was no significant difference between the study groups with respect to stone clearance, complications, requirement of blood transfusion and ancillary procedures performed. CONCLUSIONS The present study proves the advantages of tubeless PCNL. It has significantly less operative time, short hospital stays, less drop-in haemoglobin and less requirement of postoperative analgesic in comparison with standard PCNL. Thus, tubeless PCNL is effective and safe in selected group of individuals.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 95%

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 53%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Efficacy and Safety of Standard Versus Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomya Randomized Controlled Study

Ramasamy¹,

Balasubramanyan²,

Thirunavukarasu³

et al. 2019

jemds

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Considering the length of hospital stay and analgesic use, Nalbant et al [9] suggested that the tubeless PNL technique is more effective than conventional PNL. In addition, in a comparison of the data on conventional and tubeless PNL, Yun et al [10] supported the same idea.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a comparison of hospital stay and analgesic use, Nalbant et al [9] demonstrated that totally tubeless PNL was a proper alternative to standard PNL. Considering the shorter hospital stay, Yun et al [10] also emphasized that totally tubeless PNL was an effective alternative for the management of renal calculi.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy a Feasible Technique for the Treatment of Staghorn Calculi?

Lee

Kim

et al. 2013

Korean J Urol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) remains a challenging technique for the surgical treatment of staghorn renal calculi. Our study was designed to compare surgical outcomes between conventional and tubeless PNL.Materials and MethodsWe retrospectively enrolled consecutive patients who underwent conventional or tubeless PNL under general anesthesia performed by a single surgeon (H.J.) for the treatment of staghorn calculi between 2003 and 2012. All patients were divided into two groups: group 1 included patients who underwent conventional PNL and group 2 included patients who were managed by tubeless PNL for the treatment of staghorn calculi. Preoperative and postoperative parameters were analyzed between the two groups, including age, stone burden, complications, any interventions, and duration of hospital stay.ResultsA total of 165 patients (group 1, 106; group 2, 59) were enrolled in the study. No significant differences in age, sex, body mass index, or stone laterality were observed between the two groups. The mean stone burdens (±standard deviation) of group 1 and group 2 were 633.6 (±667.4) and 529.9 (±362.8), respectively (p=0.271). The postoperative stone-free clearance rate was higher in group 2 (78.0%) than in group 1 (69.8%); however, the difference was not clinically significant (p=0.127). In addition, no significant differences in postoperative complications, including fever, bleeding, infection, or additional interventions, were observed between the two groups.ConclusionsOur results demonstrated that tubeless PNL has the same effectiveness and safety as conventional PNL in the treatment of staghorn calculi. Tubeless PNL may be feasible for managing renal staghorn calculi.

show abstract

Exit Strategies After Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy

Bolton

Hennessey

2018

Smith's Textbook of Endourology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The comparison of standard and tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures

Cited by 13 publications

References 18 publications

Efficacy and Safety of Standard Versus Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomya Randomized Controlled Study

Efficacy and Safety of Standard Versus Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomya Randomized Controlled Study

Is Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy a Feasible Technique for the Treatment of Staghorn Calculi?

Exit Strategies After Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About