Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Comparison of standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy and total tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the supine position

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy, safety and advantages of the total tubeless (TT) percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and standard PCNL in the supine position.

METHODS

This study was carried out at İzmir Tepecik Health Application and Research Center. A total of 87 patients were examined. Forty-three patients who underwent TT procedure were defined as Group 1, and 44 patients who underwent standard procedure with a nephrostomy tube were defined as Group 2. Two techniques were evaluated with demographic data and outcome parameters. Univariate regression analyses were performed in these data sets for the parameters that predicted the TT procedure.

RESULTS

The demographic data of the groups and all characteristics of the stones were similar. When the results were examined, the stone-free rates detected by non-contrast computed tomography (CT) in the postoperative 1st month were similar between the groups. Complication rates and secondary intervention rates were similar. Operation and fluoroscopy times were shorter in group 1, which were not statistically significant. Postoperative hemoglobin decreased, and creatinine values were similar. In Group 1, mean postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) scores and the percentage of VAS reporting > 5 points for pain level measurement were lower and statistically significant. In the univariate analysis of the factors predicting the TT procedure, no significant results were found in any parameter.

CONCLUSION

Performing TT PCNL in the supine position in selected patients reduces postoperative pain without affecting the complication rates as in prone PCNL. Our study is the first to compare TT and standard PCNL in supine position.

Complications of tubeless versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy

PURPOSE

The necessity of nephrostomy tube after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) has been called into question in modern series. We sought to examine differences in postoperative complications and outcomes of tubeless PCNL versus standard PCNL at our institution.

METHODS

A retrospective review of our institutional stone database was conducted from January 2016 to December 2021 for patients who had undergone either tubeless PCNL, defined by placement of only an internal ureteral stent, or standard PCNL, which involved placement of an externalized nephrostomy tube. Patients were excluded if they underwent totally tubeless PCNL.

RESULTS

A total of 438 patients were included for analysis: 329 patients underwent tubeless PCNL and 109 patients underwent standard PCNL. Between tubeless and standard groups, there was no difference in readmission rates 6.1% vs. 9.2% (p = 0.268), Clavien 2 or > complications 18.5% vs. 19.3% (p = 0.923), and Clavien 3 or > complications 4.0% vs. 7.3% (p = 0.151). The tubeless group experienced shorter operative duration 121.5 vs. 144.8 min (p = 0.012), shorter length of stay 2.5 vs. 3.8 days (p = 0.002), and higher stone-free rates 72.3% vs. 60.2% (p = 0.014), but also increased blood transfusion rates 6.4% vs. 0.9% (p = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

In comparing tubeless with standard PCNL, there was no difference in readmission rates, or significant Clavien complication rates. Patients undergoing tubeless PCNL experienced higher stone-free rates, but more number of patients required postoperative blood transfusion. The decision to leave a nephrostomy tube after PCNL appears unlikely to impact overall complication rates and can be left to surgeon experience and case-based discretion.

A Comparative Analysis between Flexible Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy and Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in the Treatment of >15 mm Non-Obstructing Proximal Ureteral Stones

BACKGROUND

The proper surgical modality for large non-obstructing proximal ureteral stones is disputed. We compare effectiveness and safety of flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (FURL) and tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (TPNL) in treatment of upper ureteral stones larger than 1.5 cm.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of patients who performed FURL or TPNL for upper ureteral stones between June 2016 and November 2018. Comparative analysis was conducted regarding demographic parameters, stone free rate, postoperative pain and complications.

RESULTS

This study included 58 patients treated with FURL and 60 patients treated with TPNL owing to upper ureteral stones larger than 1.5 cm. Stone size was similar in the FURL and TPNL groups (17.6 ± 2.6 vs. 18.0 ± 2.1 mm, p = 0.194). The overall 3-month stone clearance rate was 95.8% for FURL versus 96.0% for TPNL (p = 0.575). There was no difference between the FURL and TPNL groups for hospital stay (p = 0.280) and postoperative complications. On the other hand, patients treated with FURL had longer operative time (p = 0.012) and less postoperative pain (p = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Both surgical techniques were considered feasible and effective surgical procedures in the treatment of large upper ureteral stones.

Are hemostatic agents for selective cases of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy necessary for access tract control? A randomized control trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) access tract sealing agent. Fibrin glue and Tachosil^® were used for sealing the access tract and compared to the control. Post operative computed tomography (CT) scan was used to evaluate those efficacies.

METHODS

A total of 108 patients were randomized to three groups: In group 1, the access tract was sutured, and compressive dressing was done. In group 2, the fibrin glue was injected into the access tract with a tip applicator at the end of operation. And group 3, Tachosil^® was rolled on its longitudinal axis and plugged into the access tract. Non-contrast CT at POD 1 was taken and perirenal hematoma thickness was measured and graded. Hemoglobin, hematocrit, VAS score, stone-free status, and hospital stay were analyzed.

RESULTS

Preoperative demographic differences were not significant in all three arms. Postoperative CT scans in all groups demonstrated mostly minimal grade access tract hematomas. Mean perirenal hematoma thickness showed no significant differences (2.66 ± 3.74, 2.73 ± 3.85, 2.54 ± 4.37 mm, p = 0.981), respectively. Postoperative hemoglobin drop (0.75 ± 0.58, 0.84 ± 0.47, 0.91 ± 0.60 g/dl, p = 0.74), stone-free rate (93.75, 87.87, 87.87%, p = 0.121), VAS (p = 0.499) and hospital stay (1.81 ± 0.84, 1.48 ± 0.71, 1.59 ± 0.75 day, p = 0.127) were not significantly different between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Fibrin glue and Tachosil^® in tubeless PCNL were not necessary for postoperative access tract control.

A prospective, single-centered, cohort study comparing the treatment of renal stones by following PCNL types: Standard, tubeless & totally tubeless

Introduction

Renal stones are a frequent cause of morbidity globally. The number of lumbotomies performed for benign lithiasis has been greatly decreased with the usage of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Further development is aimed at reducing tract size, leading to numerous advanced minimally invasive PCNL procedures like mini-PERC, ultra-mini-PERC, and micro-PERC. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether tubeless or totally tubeless PCNL is the safest and most efficient, less morbid management technique for renal stones compared to the standard PCNL with a nephrostomy tube.

Methodology

This is a comparative, prospective, single-centered, cohort study that took place between August 2015 and January 2018 in the Urology department of Benazir Bhutto Hospital in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. 218 patients having single/multiple stones of variable sizes were enrolled in the study. Participants were stratified into three groups; Group A: Standard PCNL treatment; Group B: Tubeless PCNL treatment; Group C Totally Tubeless treatment. Mean operation time (±SD) and stone-free rates were our primary outcomes. The rate of complications during and post-operative complications were our secondary outcomes.

Results

A total of 181 patients were included in our study. A decreasing trend can be seen in mean operation time as we move from Group A to Group C (p = 0.000). The rate of problems during operation in each group was highest (45.8%) in Group A, much lesser problems in Group C (13.3%), and least problems in Group B (8.1%) (p = 0.000). The postoperative complication rate was again the highest in Group A (30.5%), low in Group C (8.3%), and extremely low in Group B (1.6%)

Conclusion

Tubeless PCNL proved to be the safest and most effective when compared to standard and totally tubeless PCNL procedures. It also showed the highest stone-free rates and least ‘unsatisfactory’ results amongst all the groups. Conclusively, it should be performed in routine preferably.

•

In terms of safety and efficacy, tubeless PCNL outperformed both regular and completely tubeless PCNL.

•

The Tubeless PCNL is much superior than other techniques of PCNL.

•

Aftercare and difficulties during surgery are virtually nonexistent with tubeless PCNL.

•

Stone-free rates were also the highest and the least “unsatisfactory” across all groups. Finally, it's best if it's done on a regular basis.

Efficacy and safety of renal drainage options for percutaneous nephrolithotomy

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the gold-standard for treatment of renal stones larger than 20 mm. Traditionally, a nephrostomy tube (NT) is placed, causing discomfort and prolonged hospitalization but some surgeons prefer the tubeless technique (TL). Simultaneously, the effectiveness of ureteral stents after PNCL is doubtful. We investigated the safety of the TL technique as well as that of the single loop (SL) over double loop (DL) stents.

METHODS

Three hundred and twenty-one individuals submitted to PCNL in a single center were retrospectively reviewed. Statistical analysis was performed to compare procedures regarding safety and effectiveness (stone size, residual stones, operative time, peri- and post-operative complications, need for blood transfusion and length of hospital stay) between two groups regarding presence or absence of NT placement (NT [N.=198] vs. TL [N.=123]); and according to the type of stent used (SL [N.=74] vs. DL [N.=247]).

RESULTS

NT was associated with a higher complications rate compared to the TL (30.3% and 13%, respectively; P=0.001) and longer hospitalization (4 vs. 2 days; P=0.001). Regarding ureteral stents, they cause similar morbidities (20.7% and 24.4%; P=0.881), and median length of stay (3 days; P=0.947). NT and DL were more frequent in patients with higher stone burden.

CONCLUSIONS

Tubeless PCNL encompasses lower morbidity and should be considered as an option for select patients, particularly with less stone burden and uncomplicated procedures. Regarding ureteral stents, SL is a safe option and does not require further procedures for removal.

Are Nephrostomy and Ureteral Stent Necessary after Multi-Access Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy?

Introduction

Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is a well-established technique used in single -access procedure nevertheless these results challenge the multi-access PCNL as a contra-indication to application of this technique.

Aims

To compare complication rates and safety of use of this technique after multi-access PCNL.

Methods

A Total of 130 patients with renal stones were enrolled in this cohort study. Totally tubeless PCNL with single access (Group A, n = 70) and multi-access (Group B, n = 60) were done and bleedings were assessed by measuring hemoglobin (Hb) drop, blood transfusion rate and need for angioembolization besides leakage rates which were also recorded.

Results

In the 130 patients who underwent totally tubeless PCNL, no leakage from puncture site nor angioembolization cases were identified. There was no significant statistical differences between 2 groups regarding Hb drop (1.91 in single access versus 2.20 in multi-access), transfusion rate and length of hospital stay (p > 0.05). Stone-free rate was increased from 91% in single access to 97% in multi access by adding percutaneous access sites (from 91% in single access to 97% in multi-access).

Conclusions

Multi-access totally tubeless PCNL seems feasible and has comparable complication rates including Hb drop besides providing the advantage of higher stone-free rates using multi-access tracts.

Observational prospective study for surgical outcome and anesthetic feasibility of tubeless and totally tubeless supine PCNL: A single centre initial experience

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate surgical outcome and spinal anesthetic feasibility of supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) by tubeless and totally tubeless method.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This observational study included a totally 53 patients. Initial diagnosis of renal stone was based on urinary ultrasonography, kidney, ureter and bladder X-ray, and later confirmed by computed tomography urography. PCNL was done with the patient in Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia position. Nephrostomy was not done using tubeless method, while in totally tubeless method instead of insertion of double j stent, ureteral catheterization was done and the ureter catheter was kept for <24 hours. During postprocedural period, patients were observed for development of fever, perinephric collection, need for blood transfusion and duration of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Patients aged between 14 and 75 years were included in the study. Out of totally 53 patients, supine tubeless PCNL was done in 23 patients while 30 were operated using totally tubeless method. Twenty-nine patients were induced by spinal anesthesia and 24 by general anesthesia. Stone sizes were found to be in the range of 1.4cm to 5.1 cm. Forty-six (86.7%) patients were managed by inferior calyceal puncture. Three patients required double puncture in whom 2 had developed perinephric collection. Complete stone clearance achieved in 49 (92.4%) patients. Four patients developed fever and 2 cases required one unit blood transfusion postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Tubeless and totally tubeless supine PCNL is technically feasible with good surgical outcomes and can be done under spinal and general anesthesia in properly selected patients.

Outcomes for Patients Undergoing Ambulatory Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy

INTRODUCTION

Multiple studies have concluded that ambulatory percutaneous nephrolithotomy (aPCNL) is safe. However, selection criteria remain vague and no investigators have assessed the practicality of using various post-procedural drainage strategies in the ambulatory setting. In this study we establish a set of inclusion and exclusion criteria for aPCNL, compare outcomes between aPCNL patients and those admitted following PCNL, and incorporate a variety of "exit" strategies including Double-J stent, ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) stent and totally tubeless techniques.

METHODS

We developed inclusion and exclusion criteria to determine patient eligibility for aPCNL. Between January 2014 and December 2016, 52 out of 145 patients met criteria for aPCNL and 47 of these patients were ultimately discharged on the same day. Forty-seven of the remaining 98 patients who were admitted following PCNL were randomly selected as a control group. Primary outcomes included stone-free status, emergency department (ED) visits and hospital readmissions within the 6-week post-operative period. Statistical analysis was performed using Student's t-tests, chi square tests, and Fischer's exact tests.

RESULTS

Both groups had similar age (P = 0.91), sex (P = 0.68), body mass index (P = 0.91), and stone burden (P = 0.12). Patients in the ambulatory group had a lower Charlson Comorbidity score (aPCNL CCS = 0.11, inpatient PCNL CCS = 0.62, P = 0.002). Seventy three percent of ambulatory patients and 62% of standard PCNL patients had no residual stone burden 6 weeks following PCNL (P = 0.33). The average residual stone fragment in our ambulatory and standard PCNL group was 3.5 and 3.2 mm, respectively. Five patients (11%) from the aPCNL group and 4 (9%) from the standard PCNL group presented to the ED (P = 0.76). One aPCNL (2%) and three standard PCNL (6%) patients were re-admitted to the hospital (P = 0.62).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study we establish specific inclusion and exclusion criteria for aPCNL. Using these criteria we then demonstrated the practicality of using various exit strategies to facilitate aPCNL. Future randomized control trials would be beneficial in confirming the safety and efficacy of aPCNL in select patients.

A randomized controlled study comparing the standard, tubeless, and totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures for renal stones from a tertiary care hospital

Introduction:

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is an effective treatment for renal stones. Due to the significant pain and morbidity after standard PCNL because of nephrostomy tubes, various modifications of PCNL are being performed. We report a randomized trial comparing these modalities.

Materials and Methods:

A total of 75 patients were randomized into three groups of 25 each: standard PCNL with nephrostomy tubes (Group 1), tubeless PCNL with ureteric stent and no nephrostomy (Group 2), and totally tubeless PCNL without ureteric catheter or nephrostomy (Group 3). Randomization was done at the end of the procedure for those patients satisfying the inclusion criteria based on duration of surgery, single puncture tract, intraoperative bleeding, stone burden, intact pelvicalyceal system, and no residual stones at the end of procedure. The outcomes measured were hemoglobin (Hb) drop, hemorrhage, need for blood transfusion, pyrexia, urine leak, pain score, analgesic requirement, and duration of hospital stay.

Results:

There was no significant difference in hemorrhage, Hb drop, need for blood transfusion, and postoperative pyrexia among the groups. All patients except one in the standard group only had variable amount of urinary leak. The analgesic requirement and duration of hospital stay attained statistical significance in favor of tubeless and totally tubeless groups compared to the standard.

Conclusions:

Tubeless and totally tubeless PCNL are safe and effective method of renal stone management. Totally tubeless PCNL significantly reduced postoperative pain and morbidity compared to the tubeless method.

Comparison of totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for kidney stones: a randomized, clinical trial

This study aimed to compare the totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy techniques regarding their rates of success and complications in patients with kidney stones. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups. Forty-four patients (24 men; mean age: 50.40±2.02 years) received totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL; no nephrostomy catheter or ureteral catheter after PCNL) and 40 patients (18 men; mean age: 49.95±13.38 years) underwent standard PCNL (a nephrostomy catheter and ureteral catheter were used after PCNL). All surgeries were performed by one surgeon. Postoperative changes in hemoglobin, the blood transfusion rate, changes in creatinine levels, operation time, analgesic need, hospitalization time, and complication rate were compared between the groups. No significant differences were observed in age, gender, stone size, and surgery side between the groups (P<0.05). The operation time was significantly lower in the totally tubeless PCNL group than in the standard PCNL group (P=0.005). Pethidine requirements were significantly higher in the standard PCNL group than the totally tubeless PCNL group (P=0.007). Hospitalization time was significantly higher in the standard PCNL group than in the totally tubeless PCNL group (P<0.0001). The complication rate was 15% in the standard PCNL group and 9.1% in the totally tubeless PCNL group (P=0.73). The totally tubeless PCNL technique is safe and effective, even for patients with staghorn stones. This technique is associated with decreased pain, analgesic needs, and operative and hospitalization time. We believe that a normal peristaltic ureter is the best drainage tube.

Recent advancement or less invasive treatment of percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Since its initial introduction in 1976, percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) has been widely performed for the management of large renal stones and currently is recommended for staghorn calculi, kidney stones larger than 2 cm, and shock wave lithotripsy-resistant lower pole stones greater than 1 cm. However, except for open and laparoscopic surgery, PCNL is the most invasive of the minimally invasive stone surgery techniques. Over the years, technical and instrumental advances have been made in PCNL to reduce morbidity and improve effectiveness. A thorough review of the recent literature identified five major areas of progress for the advancement of PCNL: patient positioning, method of percutaneous access, development of lithotriptors, miniaturized access tracts, and postoperative nephrostomy tube management. This review provides an overview of recent advancements in PCNL and the outcomes of each area of progress and notes how much we achieve with less invasive PCNL. This information may allow us to consider the future role and future developments of PCNL.

Comparing Bleeding Complications of Double and Single Access Totally Tubeless PCNL: Is It Safe to Obtain More Accesses?

PURPOSE

To assess bleeding complications in totally tubeless double-access percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and compare it with the single-access method.

METHODS

One hundred and seven patients with large or scattered renal stones were enrolled in this cohort study. Totally tubeless PCNL with one access (group A, 70 cases) or two accesses (group B, 37 cases) was done and bleeding was assessed by measuring the hemoglobin drop of the patients, blood transfusion rate and need for performing angioembolization.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) hemoglobin drops in groups A and B were 1.97 (1.24) and 2.31 (1.24), respectively; p = 0.176. Blood transfusion rates in two groups were 7.1 and 10.8% (p = 0.716), respectively. None of our patients required angioembolization. The average hemoglobin drop and blood transfusion rate with double tracts were approximately near to those in single tract group and in acceptable ranges. The average hospital stay in groups A and B were 3.1 and 3.2 days (p = 0.074), respectively. There was no leakage from puncture site/s and stone free rates in the two groups were 85.7 and 97.3% (p = 0.093).

CONCLUSION

Totally tubeless double-access PCNL is feasible and bleeding complications are comparable to single access totally tubeless PCNL making it an effective strategy to achieve more stone free rates.

The management of the access tract after percutaneous nephrolithotomy

PURPOSE

To describe the evolution of the current technique in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) with a special focus on access tract closure techniques.

METHODS

A systematic review of outcomes and complications of tubeless PCNL was conducted using the MEDLINE and Pubmed databases between 1976 and 2014.

RESULTS

During the past decade, PCNL underwent fundamental modifications due to miniaturization of the instruments and advancements in technique. The routine use of the nephrostomy tube after PCNL has been subsequently questioned. Currently, the nephrostomy tube is increasingly omitted, and the access tract is usually sealed by haemostatic agents. An additionally ureteric stent is commonly inserted at the end of the procedure. However, the application of haemostatic sealants increases the immediate costs significantly. Still there are inconsistent data because of small study populations, lack of randomization, retrospective character and further more heterogeneous surgical techniques.

CONCLUSION

The current body of literature does not provide high-level evidence for the preferred treatment of the access tract in PCNL. However, most authors agree that a tract sealing can be omitted without increasing the risk of complication in uncomplicated procedures.

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for large upper ureteral stone: A review article

To investigate the best treatment option for large upper ureteral stone, percutaneous nephrolithotomy or laparoscopic ureterolithotomy. We searched three key word of upper ureteral stone, laparoscopic ureterolithotomy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy in PubMed, Scopus and Ebsco. We found approximately twenty suitable articles about this subject since January 1980 until January 2014. All articles studies and reviewed meticulously and brief review of these articles was written and some Ideas of experts was added. In many studies, it is suggested that success rate and complications of laparoscopic ureterolithotomy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy are the same, but percutaneous nephrolithotomy has less hospital stay time, duration of surgery and it is more cost effective. Overall it seems that percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treatment of upper ureteral stones is preferable rather than laparoscopic ureterolitothomy

Minipercutaneous nephrolithotomy in infants: a single-center experience in an endemic region in Turkey

The objective of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PNL) method in infantile patients <3 years of age diagnosed with renal stones. We studied 48 renal units in 40 patients of infantile patients <3 years of age who underwent mini-PCNL at our institute. The mean age of the patients was 24.02 (5-36) months. The mean diameter of the stones was 22.3 mm (11-45 mm). Intrarenal access was achieved under fluoroscopic (n = 43) or ultrasonographic (n = 5) guidance under general anesthesia. A 20 Fr peel-away sheath, a 17 Fr rigid nephroscope and a pneumatic intracorporeal lithotripsy were used. Mean operative time for PNL was 85 (25-135) min. Mean fluoroscopy time was estimated as 3.7 min. The mean hospital stay was 4.3 days (2-10). Mean hemoglobin loss was 0.89 g/L (11.56-10.67) and three of the patients, including one case during the perioperative period, required blood transfusions. Colonic perforation developed in one case. In two patients, urinary drainage persisted for more than 24 h after withdrawal of the nephrostomy tube. Seven patients developed urinary tract infections (UTI). At the end of the postoperative first week, the stone-free rate was estimated to be 81.2 %. In conclusion, for percutaneous management of renal stones in the infantile age group, mini-PNL is an applicable treatment modality that can be applied through small incisions. It has higher stone-free rates, shorter hospital stays, and excellent esthetic outcomes. In this age group especially, surgical exposure to hypothermia and radiation should be avoided.

Body mass index predicts outcome of ureteroscopy-assisted retrograde nephrostomy for percutaneous nephrolithotomy

INTRODUCTION

Several clinical series of retrograde nephrostomy for percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) have been published over the past 30 years demonstrating good outcomes and safety. We previously reported our adaptation of the Lawson technique, wherein we deploy the puncture wire through a flexible ureteroscope. We herein aim to clarify the performance characteristics of this nephrostomy creation technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Institutional Review Board approval and informed consent were obtained. A ureteroscopy-assisted retrograde nephrostomy (UARN) procedure was performed as described previously. Data were collected prospectively. Multiple patient and operative factors were evaluated for association with UARN success and nephrostomy creation time: body mass index (BMI), skin-to-stone distance, Guy's score, Clinical Research of the Endourological Society nephrolithometric score, hydronephrosis, stone burden, location of nephrostomy, exit from a stone-bearing calix, and use of holmium laser to access calix.

RESULTS

Nephrostomy was successful in 49/52 UARN procedures (94%). Only single access was placed: upper-18, mid-27, and lower-7. Median BMI was 29 kg/m(2) and median time for nephrostomy creation was 39 minutes. Fluoroscopy time for the entire PCNL including nephrostomy creation was 84 and 16 seconds for case numbers 1-25 and 26-52, respectively. By stepwise linear regression, variables correlating with nephrostomy creation time were BMI (r(2)=0.219), stone burden (r(2)=0.094), use of holmium laser to access calix (r(2)=0.104), and total r(2) linear=0.416.

CONCLUSIONS

UARN is an intuitive safe procedure that offers dramatic reductions in fluoroscopy times. UARN is best suited to cases requiring only one nephrostomy tract. Upper pole access is commonly performed with a subcostal technique to navigate the puncture wire below the ribs. Increasing BMI best predicts longer nephrostomy creation times; procedure failure was associated with BMI exceeding 40 kg/m(2). UARN is a robust technique for nephrostomy creation in appropriately selected patients.

Outpatient tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy and concomitant cystolitholapaxy

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is a widely employed endourologic procedure to remove renal stones. Traditionally, PCNL has been performed on an inpatient basis, with patients routinely hospitalized postoperatively. Given the ongoing rising healthcare costs, a shift toward outpatient surgery is desirable. We report the case of a 21-year-old female who was safely discharged a few hours following uncomplicated tubeless PCNL and concomitant cystolitholapaxy for a stent with encrustation on its distal coil. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first published case of tubeless PCNL with concomitant cystolitholapaxy performed on an entirely outpatient basis.

Tubeless simultaneous bilateral percutaneous nephrolithotomy: safety, feasibility and efficacy in an Indian setting

OBJECTIVES

To study the safety, feasibility and efficacy of tubeless simultaneous bilateral percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied 85 patients who underwent tubeless simultaneous bilateral percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the Department of Urology, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, Karnataka, India, from July 2006 to June 2013. The demographic profile and outcomes were compared with the other existing series reported in the literature.

RESULTS

A total of 65 male and 20 female patients with a mean age of 45.7 ± 11.6 years underwent tubeless simultaneous bilateral percutaneous nephrolithotomy. The mean stone burden was 299 mm(2), with 12 staghorn calculi. Mean operative time was 87.6 ± 35.5 min. A total of 95% of stones were cleared with single access tracts. The success rate of tubeless simultaneous bilateral percutaneous nephrolithotomy (stone clearance) was 95.2%. Mean hemoglobin drop was 1.1 ± 0.9 gm% per patient, with 10.5% of patients requiring blood transfusion. Mean hospital stay was 69.6 ± 28.4 h. Complications included urosepsis (Clavien grade 4), acute kidney injury requiring hemodialysis (grade 3), pneumonia (grade = 2) and hydrothorax requiring intercostal drainage tube insertion (grade 3). On follow up, 4.7% of the renal units required ancillary procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings confirm that tubeless simultaneous bilateral percutaneous nephrolithotomy is a safe and effective modality of treatment. It allows obviating a second anesthetic exposure, thus reducing analgesic requirement, hospitalization time and costs. This translates into a significant socioeconomic impact on the outlook of Indian patients presenting with bilateral renal stone disease.

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: Large tube, small tube, tubeless, or totally tubeless?

The role of percutaneous nephrostomy tube for drainage after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) procedure has come under scrutiny in recent years. The procedure has been modified to use of small diameter tubes, ‘tubeless’ PCNL, and even ‘totally tubeless’ PCNL. A review of the available literature confirms that the chosen method of drainage after PCNL has a bearing upon the post-operative course. It is generally recognized now that small tubes offer benefit in terms of reduced post-operative pain and morbidity. Similarly, nephrostomy-free or ‘tubeless’ PCNL, using a double-J stent or ureteric catheter as alternative form of drainage, can be used with a favorable outcome in selected patients with the advantage of decreased postoperative pain, analgesia requirement, and hospital stay. Although the tubeless technique has been applied for extended indications as well, the available evidence is insufficient, and needs to be substantiated by prospective randomized trials. In addition, ‘totally tubeless’ approach has also been shown to be feasible in selected patients.

The comparison of standard and tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures

PURPOSE

To compare totally tubeless and standard percutaneous nephrolitotomy procedures on many parameters.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Percutaneous nephrolitotomy was performed on 195 patients between June 2009 and May 2012. The data of those patients were evaluated retrospectively. Totally tubeless cases were enrolled to Group 1, and Group 2 consisted of non-tubeless cases (re-entry or Foley catheter).

RESULTS

Group 1 included 85 cases and group 2 a total of 110 patients. Paper tracing values for the kidney stones were 321.25 ± 102.4 mm(2) and 324.10 ± 169.5 mm(2) respectively. Mean fluoroscopy time was 4.9 ± 1.9 min and 5.08 ± 2.7 min, mean operation time was 78.8 ± 27.9 min and 81.9 ± 28.77 min and mean decrease in hematocrit was 2.6 ± 1.6 and 3.74 ± 1.9 respectively. All these comparisons were statistically significant. Length of hospitalization was 1.6 ± 1.1 and 3.5 ± 1.5 days for Groups 1 and 2 respectively. Mean superficial pain score was 5.8 ± 1.6 and 6.7 ± 1.2 respectively for both groups after 1 hour. At 6 hours, the scores changed to 3.87 ± 1.22 and 4.84 ± 1.3 respectively. The analgesic dose was 1.00 ± 0.7 and 1.53 ± 0.6 for the groups respectively at 6 hours. All the statistical differences were significant for these three parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

We believe that, because of their post operative patient comfort and decreased length of hospital stay, totally tubeless procedures should be considered as an alternative to standard percutaneous nephrolitotomy.

Total tubeless versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of total tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) versus standard PCNL.

METHOD

MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database were researched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and clinically controlled trials (CCTs) comparing total tubeless PCNL (tubeless and stentless) versus standard PCNL were included in this review. The related studies that met the inclusion criteria were included in the meta-analysis. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of each included studies and extracted data. RevMan 5.1. was used for meta-analysis.

OUTCOME

Five RCTs and four CCTs were included, involving a total of 652 patients. All patients were divided into the total tubeless PCNL group and the standard PCNL group. The pooled results showed that the total tubeless PCNL group significantly reduced the hospital stay [weighted mean difference (WMD) -1.09 (95% confidence intervals, 95% CI -1.33, -0.85)] and analgesic requirement [standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.59 (95% CI -0.96, -0.23)]. There was no statistically significant difference in the operation time [WMD -4.14 (95% CI -8.27, -0.01)], mean hemoglobin decrease [-0.07 (95% CI -0.20, 0.06)], fever [relative risk (RR) 0.53 (95% CI 0.16, 1.69)], transfusion [RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.40, 1.85)], prolonged urinary drainage [RR 0.58 (95% CI 0.08, 4.09)], and ancillary procedure [extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, RR 0.84 (95% CI 0.29, 2.41), second-look PCNL RR 1.18 (95% CI 0.49, 2.89)]. According to the study design, the subgroup analyses were performed; most results were consistent with the overall findings, except the one that evaluated the analgesic requirement in the CCT subgroup.

CONCLUSION

Total tubeless PCNL is a safe and effective procedure. It significantly reduced the hospital stay, analgesic requirement, and the time to return to normal activity without increasing complications. However, further randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Comparative Study between Standard and Totally Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy

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.

Treatment of ipsilateral renal ureteral calculi by combining retroperitoneal laparoscopic surgery with tubeless mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy

OBJECTIVES

To report and discuss the role of the treatment of ipsilateral renal and upper middle ureteral stones in patients by combing retroperitoneal laparoscopic surgery with tubeless mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eleven patients associated with ipsilateral renal and upper middle ureteral stones underwent combing retroperitoneal laparoscopic surgery with tubeless mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy after failure of shockwave or ureteroscopy lithotripsy. Their data were analyzed retrospectively including stone burden, perioperative complications and outcomes.

RESULTS

All the patients underwent retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy and tubeless mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy successfully. Surgical time ranged from 80 to 160 min with a mean of 118 min. The mean hospital stay was 4 days (3-7 days). The mean length of retroperitoneal urinary drainage was 3 days (2-6 days). There were minor complications in 3 (27.2%) patients. The stone-free rate was 82% (9 patients). Two patients had a residual calyceal fragment that was treated with shockwave lithotripsy. All of them were followed up for 3-24 months. Renal function was improved in different degree.

CONCLUSION

In carefully selected patients, combining retroperitoneal laparoscopic surgery with tubeless mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy can treat ipsilateral renal and upper middle ureteral calculi by a single procedure with advantages of high stone-free rate, safety, reliability, rapid recovery and less complications.

Advances in percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the most morbid of the minimally invasive surgeical procedures for stone removal. Over the last 2 decades, refinements in technique and new technology have improved the efficacy and the efficiency of the procedure. Although PCNL has long been the procedure of choice for large and complex stones, it is increasingly being used for moderate stone burdens because of its high stone-free rates and because of the limitations of shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy. The article reviews advances in the technique and technology applied to percutaneous access, tract dilation, stone visualization, stone fragmentation, stone clearance, and postoperative management.

Supracostal tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients undergoing supracostal percutaneous renal access.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

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).

RESULTS

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).

CONCLUSIONS

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.

Standard versus tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

This article systematically analyses comparative studies to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) versus standard PCNL.

METHODS

The Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane and DARE databases were searched from 1997 to February 2011. Comparative studies evaluating outcomes from standard versus tubeless PCNL were included. Primary outcome measures were post-operative pain scoring, analgesic requirements, duration of hospitalisation/convalescence, operation time, major/minor complications and stone-free rates.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies were included (11 randomised control trials and 13 retrospective or prospective studies). Levels of pain recorded, analgesic requirements, duration of inpatient stay and convalescence time were all significantly reduced in the tubeless PCNL group. Cost was reduced in two studies. Morbidity was not significantly different between the groups. There was no significant difference between groups regarding stone-free status.

DISCUSSION

This systematic review has demonstrated that tubeless PCNL is a viable alternative to tubed PCNL in uncomplicated cases. Benefits are as described above. There is no evidence suggesting that patient safety is compromised by the absence of post-operative nephrostomy. The tubeless method has been reported in challenging cases such as stag-horn stones, horseshoe or ectopic kidneys. Promising outcomes have been demonstrated in elderly patients and when clinical needs demand a supracostal approach. Multi-centre randomised controlled trials are needed to fully establish the effectiveness of the tubeless method.

Prediction of morbidity and mortality after percutaneous nephrolithotomy by using the Charlson Comorbidity Index

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) predicts postoperative medical complications and death in patients treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).

METHODS

A total of 1406 PCNL procedures were performed at 4-stone referral centers between September 2004 and March 2011 were reviewed in this multicenter study. Variables included patient and stone characteristics, preoperative comorbidities, intraoperative data, and postoperative complications, including mortality.

RESULTS

The present study included 868 (61.7%) men and 538 (38.3%) women. Mean patient age was 44.1 years (range 1-81). CCI score was calculated as "0" for 993 patients (70.6%, called group I), "1" for 316 patients (22.5%, called group II) and"≥2" for 97 patients (6.9%, called group III). The incidence of comorbidities increased with age (P=.001). The overall postoperative complication rate was 29.3%. Life-threatening medical complications developed in 2.9% of patients in group I, 7.6% of patients in group II, and 21.6% of patients in group III, (P=.001). There were 3 deaths for an overall 0.2% mortality rate. Perioperative bleeding requiring blood transfusion was observed in 9.5% of patients, and we found an increased risk of hemorrhage associated with CCI score (P=.049). High CCI score, patient age, hemorrhage, and operative time were significantly related to higher medical complication rates after PCNL.

CONCLUSIONS

CCI is a quick, simple, and reproducible scoring system that accurately predicts the morbidity and mortality of PCNL.

Can we avoid percutaneous nephrolithotomy in high-risk elderly patients using the Charlson comorbidity index?

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) predicts the postoperative complications after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and could be a plausible option to avoid surgery and its potential risks in elderly patients with significant comorbidites.

METHODS

The data from 283 elderly patients (age ≥ 60 years) who underwent PCNL in 4 large referral hospitals were reviewed in the present multicenter study. For each patient, we evaluated pre-existing comorbidities and calculated the CCI score. The patients were classified to 3 CCI score categories (0, 1, ≥ 2) and compared regarding the stone-free and complications rates.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 64.7, 65.6, and 67.7 years in the 3 groups. The stone-free rate after primary PCNL was 85.7% in group 1, 86.1% in group 2, and 75.0% in group 3. These rates increased to 90.8%, 95.4%, and 83.9% after a second intervention (P = .049). The overall postoperative complication rate was 38.8%. The most common complication was hemorrhage necessitating blood transfusion in 34 patients (12%), and we found an increased risk of hemorrhage associated with the CCI score (P = .011). Life-threatening medical complications developed in 7.6% of the patients in group 1, 12% of the patients in group 2, and 28.6% of the patients in group 3 (P = .001). A multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that a high CCI score, bleeding, and operative time had significant influence on the postoperative medical complication in this population.

CONCLUSION

Conservative management of asymptomatic large kidney stones appears to be a safe alternative to PCNL in elderly patients with significant comorbidites.

Outpatient tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: the initial case series

INTRODUCTION

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) has traditionally been performed on an inpatient basis. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of tubeless PCNL on a completely outpatient basis. The purposes of this study were to assess the safety and efficacy of outpatient PCNL.

METHODS

We reviewed the initial consecutive outpatient tubeless PCNLs performed at our institution by a single surgeon. Patients were discharged home the day of surgery only after meeting strict discharge criteria. Preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative data were collected prospectively.

RESULTS

Outpatient tubeless PCNL was performed in 3 patients. The mean maximum stone diameter was 14 mm. The average hospital stay was 175 minutes. All 3 patients were discharged home in stable condition after meeting all of the inclusion criteria. There were no emergency room visits or hospital readmissions postoperatively. The mean follow-up period was 47 days. All stones were calcium oxalate and the stone free rate was 100%. There were no minor or major complications.

CONCLUSION

In properly selected patients, outpatient tubeless PCNL is safe and effective. Our initial experience with outpatient PCNL has been favourable and warrants further investigation in a larger patient population.

Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Introduction and Objective:

Placement of a percutaneous nephrostomy tube for drainage has been an integral part of the standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) procedure. However, in recent years, the procedure has been modified to what has been called ‘tubeless’ PCNL, in which nephrostomy tube is replaced with internal drainage provided by a double-J stent or a ureteral catheter. The objective of this article is to review the evidence-based literature on ‘nephrostomy-free’ or ‘tubeless’ PCNL to compare the safety, effectiveness, feasibility, and advantages of tubeless PCNL over standard PCNL.

Materials and Methods:

We performed a MEDLINE database search to retrieve all published articles relating to ‘tubeless’ PCNL. Cross-references from retrieved articles as well as articles from urology journals not indexed in MEDLINE, were also retrieved.

Results:

The majority of the studies have shown ‘tubeless’ PCNL to be a safe and economical procedure, with reduced postoperative pain and morbidity and shorter hospital stay. tubeless PCNL has been found to be safe and effective even in patients with multiple stones, complex staghorn stones, concurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction, and various degrees of hydronephrosis. The technique has been successful in obese patients, children, and in patients with recurrent stones after open surgery.

Conclusion:

Tubeless PCNL can be used with a favorable outcome in selected patients (stone burden <3 cm, single tract access, no significant residual stones, no significant perforation, minimal bleeding, and no requirement for a secondary procedure), with the potential advantages of decreased postoperative pain, analgesia requirement, and hospital stay. However, for extended indications, like supine PCNL, multiple, complex and staghorn stones, and concurrent PUJ obstruction, the evidence is insufficient and should come from prospective randomized trials.

Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy for upper pole renal stone using subcostal access

PURPOSE

To assess the outcome and safety of the totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) from subcostal access in patients with renal stone in the upper pole of the kidney.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seventy patients with upper pole renal stones were enrolled in a randomized clinical trial from April 2003 to November 2008. The inclusion criteria were the existence of solely upper pole stones, stone size >1.5 cm, extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy failure or stone in closed calix and diverticulum, and successful subcostal access for reaching the stone. The exclusion criteria were unsuccessful subcostal access, more than two percutaneous accesses, prominent collecting system perforation, intraoperative significant bleeding, ureteral obstruction, and renal anomaly. The totally tubeless procedure was performed on 35 patients (group A); another 35 patients (group B) underwent standard PCNL. The incidence of complications, hospital stay, transfusion rate, stone-free rate, and analgesics use as well as return to normal activity were compared during a 1-month study period.

RESULTS

The mean stone burden was 2.81 (standard deviation [SD] = 0.59) in group A vs 2.87 (SD = 0.62) cm(2) in group B. Hospitalization averaged 1.49 (SD = 0.7) vs 2.89 (SD = 0.99) days (P < 0.001), and the average analgesics use was 8.2 (SD = 3.59) mg vs 14.3 (SD = 5.99) mg of morphine, respectively (P < 0.001). The patients returned to normal activity in 11 (SD = 4.2) days in group A vs 17.6 (SD = 4) days in group B (P < 0.001). Operative time, transfusion rate, complications, re-treatment, and the overall stone-free rate were not different significantly, and no major complication was seen in the study as well.

CONCLUSION

Totally tubeless PCNL for the upper pole renal stone from subcostal access is accompanied by decreased hospital stay and analgesics use and a rapid return to normal activity. It can be considered as an accepted and cost-beneficial procedure for upper pole renal stones.

Tubeless procedure is most important factor in reducing length of hospitalization after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: results of univariable and multivariable models

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of kidney stones and patient-related parameters on the length of hospitalization (LOH), which is one important factor affecting the cost effectiveness of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Recently, increases in healthcare costs have highlighted the importance of evaluating the cost effectiveness of a treatment as much as its efficacy.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

During an 8-year period, the records of 1669 patients with renal calculi who underwent PCNL were reviewed retrospectively. Eleven patients with urosepsis were excluded from the present study. A total of 1658 patients were categorized into 2 groups (group 1 = ≤2 days; group 2 = >2 days) according to the median LOH (median = 2 days). Multivariate binary logistic regression analysis was used to detect the effects of independent variables, including the patient age, gender, body mass index, history of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy or open surgery, stone size and opacity, presence of hydronephrosis, and localization and number of accesses, on the LOH after PNL.

RESULTS

Overall success was achieved in 86.2% of cases after one session of PCNL. The mean length of hospitalization was 2.89 ± 1.66 days (range, 1-21). According to the outcome of the multivariate analysis, diabetes (P = .0001, OR = 1.67), impaired kidney function (P = .03, OR = 1.64), stone size (P = .031, OR = 1.31), number of accesses (P = .001, OR = 1.59), intercostal access (P = .001, OR = 1.79), and tubeless procedure (P = .0001, OR = 0.23) were variables influencing LOH.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of diabetes, a large stone burden, intercostals access, multiple accesses, and impaired kidney function prolong the LOH after PCNL. The use of the tubeless procedure was able to diminish the LOH.

Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy--the new standard of care?

PURPOSE

Traditionally the placement of a nephrostomy tube at the conclusion of percutaneous nephrolithotomy is considered the standard of care. However, the need for nephrostomy tube placement has been questioned by numerous authors. We evaluated the literature regarding tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and determined potential candidates for tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy and whether this procedure can be considered the new standard of care for complex stone removal.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A MEDLINE search was conducted between May 1997 and January 2010 to detect studies reporting tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy. "Nephrolithiasis," "percutaneous nephrolithotomy," "tubeless" and "lithotripsy" were used as medical subject headings (MeSH) key words. Additional citations were identified by reviewing the reference lists of the included articles. All relevant articles were reviewed for indications, outcomes and complications.

RESULTS

The data obtained from 50 reports document comparable complication rates between tubeless and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy demonstrated advantages such as less pain, less debilitation, less costs and a shorter hospital stay. Mean stone-free rates for tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy were as high as 89%.

CONCLUSIONS

Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy appears to be safe and efficacious in uneventful procedures, in children, in obese patients, in simultaneous bilateral procedures, in supracostal access and in renal units with coexisting anatomical anomalies. Nephrostomy tube placement should still be considered in certain cases such as those with more than 2 nephrostomy access tracts, those necessitating a second look and those with intraoperative complications such as significant bleeding or collecting system perforation.

Should percutaneous nephrolithotripsy be considered the primary therapy for lower pole stones?

PURPOSE

The efficacy of percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PCNL) as a primary therapy for the treatment of lower pole caliceal lithiasis was determined.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We reviewed 144 consecutive files of patients, over a period of 10 years, with noncomplicated lower pole calculi, who underwent PCNL after a single unsuccessful session of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL).

RESULTS

The stone-free rate for stones less than 10 mm was 95%. A 97% rate was accomplished for stones between 11 and 20 mm and a 98% rate for stones larger than 20 mm. PCNL achieved a mean overall stone-free rate of 96.7% after a 3-month follow-up, regardless of stone size. PCNL outclasses SWL, when stratified by stone burden and lower pole location. No significant postoperative complications were encountered.

CONCLUSION

PCNL is a safe and effective procedure for the management of lower pole caliceal calculi after a single unsuccessful SWL session. This procedure should be considered the primary method for the treatment of lower pole stones.

Are multiple nephrostomy tubes necessary after multitract percutaneous nephrolithotomy? A randomized comparison of single versus multiple nephrostomy tubes

PURPOSE

Placement of multiple nephrostomy tubes is the standard practice after completion of multitract percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for complex/staghorn calculi. We conducted a study to see whether use of a single nephrostomy tube in comparison with multiple tubes reduces postoperative discomfort without compromising safety of the procedure.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

One hundred and ninety-two patients with complex/staghorn renal calculi who were treated with PCNL requiring multiple tracts were included in the study. The inclusion criteria included normal renal function, complete clearance of calculi, and no significant intraoperative complication. Patients were randomized into two groups on operation table at completion of procedure-group A, single nephrostomy tube placement after multitract PCNL; group B, one nephrostomy tube for each tract.

RESULTS

Postoperative analgesia requirement in group A was significantly less than that in group B (111.9 +/- 27.4 mg meperidine in group A; 165.8 +/- 34.4 mg in group B) (p < 0.001). The difference in average blood loss for two groups was not statistically significant (drop in hemoglobin: group A, 0.48 gm%; group B, 0.51 gm%) (p = 0.55). Three patients in group A and four in group B required blood transfusion (p = 0.65). The average hospital stay in group A (42.4 +/- 8.6 hours) was significantly shorter than that in group B (68.1 +/- 6 hours) (p < 0.001). No long-term squealae were noticed in the median follow-up of 18 months in any patient.

CONCLUSION

The present study demonstrates that use of a single nephrostomy tube in multitract PCNL is safe and as effective as the conventional practice of placing multiple tubes. In addition, a single tube minimizes postoperative morbidity related to the drainage tubes.

The use of adjunctive hemostatic agents for tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is a viable option for selected patients, particularly those with solitary calculi, multiple stones located in a single location, or those that can be accessed using one access tract. Benefits over the standard PCNL include reduced hospital stay, decreased pain, and decreased urine leak from the access site that would typically occur from around the nephrostomy tube. Hemostatic agents in the form of fibrin "glue" or gelatin matrix substances have been demonstrated to be safe and effective to augment the tubeless procedure. The most appropriate sealant agent available is yet to be determined. We present a review of the contemporary literature on the use of hemostatic agents for tubeless PCNL.

Renal drainage after percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Exit strategy after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is an area of continuing innovation to improve postoperative morbidity and operative outcomes for patients. The two important components of an exit strategy after PCNL are hemostasis and renal drainage. We review the different techniques of renal drainage after PCNL-ie, nephrostomy tube, ureteral stents, and totally tubeless strategy with critical discussion of available evidence for and against each of these techniques. We conclude that the optimal renal drainage method depends on patient characteristics and the operative course; hence, it should be individualized. To simplify this, we group patients undergoing PCNL as routine, problematic, and complicated, based on increasing complexity of the procedure and procedural complications. In routine PCNLs, we favor placement of an ureteral stent or a small-bore nephrostomy tube. In problematic and complicated PCNLs, we think the evidence directs toward placement of a nephrostomy tube, small bore being an option in problematic PCNLs.

'Nephrostomy-free' percutaneous nephrolithotomy: experience in a UK district general hospital

INTRODUCTION

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the first-line treatment for large and complex renal calculi. Accepted UK practice is to insert a nephrostomy tube at the end of the procedure to drain the kidney and reduce potential complications. 'Tubeless' or 'nephrostomy-free' PCNL has been advocated in selected patients as it is thought to reduce length of hospital stay, analgesia requirements and pain experienced. We present our outcomes of a consecutive series (n = 101) of 'nephrostomy-free' PCNLs compared to standard PCNL over a 4-year period.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between January 2004 and October 2006, we performed 55 standard (with nephrostomy tube) PCNLs (Group 1). From October 2006 onwards, we changed our technique and have performed 46 consecutive 'nephrostomy-free' PCNLs (JJ stent inserted), independent of patient and stone factors (Group 2). We have compared the two groups in terms of length of hospital stay (LOS), analgesia requirements, transfusion rates, haemoglobin (Hb) decrease and immediate, early and late complications.

RESULTS

'Nephrostomy-free' PCNL significantly reduced the length of hospital stay (2.8 vs 5.1 days; P < 0.001), morphine-based analgesia requirements (23% no morphine required vs 2.8%; P < 0.001), transfusion rate (2.5% vs 7%; P < 0.01) and mean Hb decrease (1.89 g/dl vs 2.25 g/dl; P > 0.05). Overall, no patient experienced a serious complication. All attempted 'nephrostomy-free' PCNLs were completed (stone clearance 95%) and no patient needed an unplanned nephrostomy. Only 5% in Group 2 needed their ureteric JJ stent removing earlier than planned secondary to pain. Both groups were comparable in terms of immediate, early and late complications, though three patients in Group 1 developed chronic loin pain and one patient in the 'nephrostomy-free' group developed a delayed perirenal haematoma.

CONCLUSIONS

'Nephrostomy-free' percutaneous nephrolithotomy is a safe, effective and feasible procedure independent of patient and stone factors. It decreases the length of hospital stay, the pain experienced and the need for morphine-based analgesia; we feel it should be the standard of care for patients undergoing a PCNL.