Prospective randomized trial of three different methods of nephrostomy tract closure after percutaneous nephrolithotripsy

Totally tubeless, tubeless, and tubed percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treating kidney stones

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) is the standard of care for removing large kidney stones (> 2 cm). Once the procedure is complete, different exiting strategies exist to manage the percutaneous tract opening, including placement of an external nephrostomy tube, placement of an internal ureteral stent, or no external or internal tube. The decision to place or not place a tube is handled differently among clinicians and may affect patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of tubeless PNL (with ureteral stenting), totally tubeless PNL (without ureteral stenting or nephrostomy), and standard PNL (nephrostomy only) for the treatment of kidney stones in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search in multiple biomedical databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science), as well as in two clinical trial registries. We also handsearched reference lists of relevant publications and conference proceedings. We applied no language restrictions. The latest search update was conducted in September 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled and quasi-randomized controlled trials of adult patients who received tubeless, totally tubeless, or standard PNL for treating kidney stones. We defined tubeless PNL as no nephrostomy tube, but ureteral stenting, while totally tubeless PNL meant no nephrostomy tube or ureteral stenting. Both interventions were compared to standard PNL with placement of a nephrostomy tube (only). We considered access tubes of any sizes. We only considered unilateral PNL with single-tract access. There were no exclusions on stone composition, size, or location.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the literature, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and rated the certainty of evidence using GRADE. Primary outcomes were severe adverse events and postoperative pain, and secondary outcomes were operating time, length of hospital stay, and stone-free rate. We used the random-effects model for meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 studies in the review. Participant age varied among studies, ranging from 20 to 60 years. Detailed information on stone characteristics was rarely presented. Tubeless PNL versus standard PNL We are very uncertain whether there is a difference in severe adverse events (SAEs) between tubeless PNL and standard PNL (risk ratio (RR) 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14 to 16.46; I2 = 42%; 2 studies, 46 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Tubeless PNL may have little to no effect on pain on postoperative day one (mean difference (MD) 0.56 lower, 95% CI 1.34 lower to 0.21 higher; I2 = 84%; 4 studies, 186 participants; low-certainty evidence), and probably results in little to no difference in operating room time (MD 0.40 longer (in minutes), 95% CI 4.82 shorter to 5.62 longer; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 81 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Tubeless PNL may reduce length of hospital stay (MD 0.90 shorter, 95% CI 1.45 shorter to 0.35 shorter; I2 = 84%; 6 studies, 238 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain of the effect of tubeless PNL on blood transfusions (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.16 to 2.52; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 161 participants; very low-certainty evidence), sepsis or fever (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 4.75; I2 = not applicable; 2 studies, 82 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or readmissions (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.07 to 14.21; I2 = not applicable, 1 study, 24 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Totally tubeless versus standard PNL Totally tubeless PNL may result in lower SAE rates (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.25; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 174 participants; low-certainty evidence) and pain on postoperative day one (MD 3.60 lower, 95% CI 4.24 lower to 2.96 lower; I2 = Not applicable; 1 study, 50 participants; low-certainty evidence). Totally tubeless PNL may result in little to no difference in operating room time (MD 6.23 shorter (in minutes), 95% CI 14.29 shorter to 1.84 longer; I2 = 72%; 2 studies, 174 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and sepsis or fever (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.97; I2 = not applicable; 1 study, 90 participants; low-certainty evidence). Totally tubeless PNL likely shortens the length of hospital stay (MD 1.55 shorter, 95% CI 1.82 shorter to 1.29 shorter; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 274 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain of the effect of totally tubeless PNL on blood transfusions (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.48; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 274 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or readmissions (RR not estimable, 95% CI not estimable; I2 = not applicable; 1 study, 50 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We found no studies comparing tubeless mini versus standard mini-PNL or totally tubeless mini versus standard mini-PNL.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When comparing tubeless to standard PNL with regard to the predefined primary outcomes of this review, there may be little difference in early postoperative pain, while we are very uncertain of the effect on SAEs. People treated with tubeless PNL may benefit from a reduced length of stay compared to standard PNL. When comparing totally tubeless to standard PNL, early postoperative pain and severe adverse events may be reduced with totally tubeless PNL. The certainty of evidence by outcome was mostly very low (range: moderate to very low) for the comparison of tubeless to standard PNL and low (range: moderate to very low) for the comparison of totally tubeless to standard PNL. The most common reasons for downgrading the certainty of the evidence were study limitations, inconsistency, and imprecision. We did not find randomized trial evidence for other comparisons. Overall, further and higher-quality studies are needed to inform clinical practice.

Comparison of outcomes in totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy according to nephrostomy tract sealing with fibrin versus gelatin matrix: a propensity score matching study

To investigate and compare surgical outcomes in totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (ttPCNL) patients according to the type of sealant during nephrostomy tract closure, the records of 158 patients who underwent ttPCNL were retrospectively reviewed. Fibrin sealant [Tisseel^®; n = 107, fibrin-only sealant (FS)] or gelatin matrix hemostatic sealant [FloSeal^®; n = 51, gelatin matrix sealant (GS)] was applied during tract closure according to surgeon's preference. On the first postoperative day, computed tomography (CT) was scanned for all patients. Unsatisfactory radiological outcome (URO) was defined as any postoperative hematoma or urinoma (≥ 2 cm) on the CT. Unsatisfactory clinical outcome (UCO) was defined as any adverse event requiring additional intervention. Both UROs and UCOs were sub-classified as either hemorrhage or drainage related. 2:1 propensity score matching was applied according to clinical parameters. Median age was 58 (19-78) years and a mean stone size was 2.1 ± 1.1 cm. The treatment success rate (stone free or < 4 mm residual) among all patients was 91.1% (144/158). UROs and UCOs occurred in 35.4% (86/158) and 11.4% (18/158) of all cases, respectively. Neither of the frequency of URO nor hemorrhage-related UCO was different according to sealant type. However, drainage-related UCOs were more prevalent among the GS group, mainly due to the higher postoperative ureter stenting rate. The postoperative pain severity and the length of hospitalization were comparable between groups. In summary, using GS rather than FS during tract closure did not worsen hemorrhage-related outcomes. However, the clinical risk of ureter occlusion requiring additional temporary ureteral stenting was increased.

SF-36 total score as a single measure of health-related quality of life: Scoping review

According to the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey questionnaire developers, a global measure of health-related quality of life such as the “SF-36 Total/Global/Overall Score” cannot be generated from the questionnaire. However, studies keep on reporting such measure. This study aimed to evaluate the frequency and to describe some characteristics of articles reporting the SF-36 Total/Global/Overall Score in the scientific literature. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses method was adapted to a scoping review. We performed searches in PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, BVS, and Cochrane Library databases for articles using such scores. We found 172 articles published between 1997 and 2015; 110 (64.0%) of them were published from 2010 onwards; 30.0% appeared in journals with Impact Factor 3.00 or greater. Overall, 129 (75.0%) out of the 172 studies did not specify the method for calculating the “SF-36 Total Score”; 13 studies did not specify their methods but referred to the SF-36 developers’ studies or others; and 30 articles used different strategies for calculating such score, the most frequent being arithmetic averaging of the eight SF-36 domains scores. We concluded that the “SF-36 Total/Global/Overall Score” has been increasingly reported in the scientific literature. Researchers should be aware of this procedure and of its possible impacts upon human health.

Application of nephrostomy tubes with balloon after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of nephrostomy tubing with balloon on postoperative hemorrhage after percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

METHODS

A total of 284 patients with upper urinary calculi were enrolled for blocked randomization with 71 blocks and block length of 4. The experimental group consisted of 143 patients receiving 14-Fr silicone tubing with balloon, and the control group consisted of 141 patients receiving 14-Fr silicone tubing without balloon. One patient in the control group developed intraoperative bleeding as a result of calyceal laceration, and was reassigned to the experimental group receiving nephrostomy tubing with balloon.

RESULTS

Postoperative drop in hemoglobin level at 3 days was significantly less in the experimental group (3.31 ± 2.85 g/L) compared with the control group (5.14 ± 3.43 g/L) (P < 0.001). The duration of gross hematuria, defined by urine with visible light or bright red color (2.73 ± 1.59 days vs. 3.55 ± 2.09 days, P < 0.001), and the incidence of postoperative extravasation (22/143 vs. 38/141, P < 0.05) for patients in the experimental group (implanted with 14-Fr silicone tubing with balloon) were significantly lower compared with the control group.

CONCLUSION

Use of indwelling nephrostomy tubes with balloon after percutaneous nephrolithotomy can reduce blood loss. Further consideration for more widespread adoption of this type of tubing to limit perioperative bleeding complications is warranted.

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.

Evaluation and comparison of urolithiasis scoring systems used in percutaneous kidney stone surgery

PURPOSE

Contemporary predictive tools for percutaneous nephrolithotomy outcomes include the Guy stone score, S.T.O.N.E. nephrolithometry and the CROES nephrolithometric nomogram. We compared each scoring system in the same cohort to determine which was most predictive of surgical outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients who underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy between 2009 and 2012 at a total of 3 academic institutions. We calculated the Guy stone score, the S.T.O.N.E. nephrolithometry score and the CROES nephrolithometric nomogram score based on preoperative computerized tomography images. A single observer at each institution reviewed all images and assigned scores. Univariate and multivariate analysis was done to determine the most predictive scoring system.

RESULTS

We enrolled 246 patients in study. In stone-free patients vs those with residual stones the mean Guy score was 2.2 vs 2.7, the mean S.T.O.N.E. score was 8.3 vs 9.5 and the mean CROES nomogram score was 222 vs 187 (each p <0.001). Logistic regression revealed that the Guy, S.T.O.N.E. nephrolithometry and CROES nomogram scores were significantly associated with stone-free status (p = 0.02, 0.004 and <0.001, respectively). The Guy and S.T.O.N.E. nephrolithometry scores were associated with estimated blood loss (p <0.0001 and 0.03) and length of stay (p = 0.03 and 0.009, respectively). The CROES nomogram did not predict estimated blood loss or length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

All scoring systems and the stone burden equally predicted stone-free status. The Guy and S.T.O.N.E. nephrolithometry scores were associated with estimated blood loss and length of stay. A single scoring system should be adopted to unify reporting.

Hemostatic agents used for nephrostomy tract closure after tubeless PCNL: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To evaluate the role of hemostatic agents used for nephrostomy tract closure after tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). A systematic review of Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane was performed. All studies that compared hemostatic agents with common methods (silk stitch or pressure dressing) were included. The analyzed outcomes were hospital stay, operative time, blood loss, transfusion rate, fever rate, and complication rate. A total of eight articles including six RCTs met our criteria. Hemostatic agents showed short hospital stay (MD -4.54, 95 % CI -6.78 to -2.36, p < 0.0001). There was no difference between hemostatic agents and common methods on operative time (MD 2.00, 95 % CI -17.32 to 21.33, p = 0.84), blood loss (MD -0.19, 95 % CI -0.41 to 0.03, p = 0.08), transfusion rate (OR 1.42, 95 % CI 0.34-5.96, p = 0.63), fever rate (OR 1.02, 95 % CI 0.33-3.12, p = 0.97) and complication rate (OR 1.02, 95 % CI 0.33-3.12, p = 0.97). Eight studies including six RCTs showed that use of hemostatic agents was safe. Hemostatic agents showed short hospital stay. There were no difference between hemostatic agents and common methods on blood loss, transfusion rate, fever rate, and complication rate.

Assessing the use of haemostatic sealants in tubeless percutaneous renal access and their effect on renal drainage and histology: an experimental porcine study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the mid-term effects of haemostatic sealant application during tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) on renal drainage and histology in an in vivo porcine study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Bilateral percutaneous access was established in 28 porcine renal units. At the end of the procedure, a type 1 absorbable fish origin collagen powder, a human fibrinogen- and thrombin-coated sponge or a cross-linked gelatin granule/topical thrombin matrix were randomly placed on the nephrostomy tracts. Four nephrostomy accesses were left intact and served as controls. No percutaneous tube, ureteric stent or bladder catheter was left in place postoperatively. Computed tomography urography on postoperative days 1, 15, 30 and 40 was used to access renal drainage. On postoperative day 40, all animals were killed and both kidneys from each animal were harvested for histological evaluation.

RESULTS

Evidence of risk for drainage occlusion after sealant application was found. The use of haemostatic sealants was associated with significant histological lesions in the renal parenchyma, regardless of which sealant was used. No sealant was identified as superior to the others. Nephrostomy tracts that were left without sealant application (control group) were associated with no morbidity and fewer histopathological changes.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on these experimental results, the safety of the application of haemostatic sealants in tubeless PCNL should be reassessed, focusing not only on the potential of such materials to occlude urinary drainage but also on their effect on renal histology. Further investigation is considered necessary.

Exit strategies following percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL): a comparison of surgical outcomes in the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society (CROES) PCNL Global Study

Purpose

To compare the characteristics and outcomes of exit strategies following percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) using the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society (CROES) PCNL Global Study database.

Materials and methods

Two matched data sets were prepared in order to compare stent only versus NT only and TTL versus NT only. Patients were matched on the exit strategy using the following variables: case volume of the center where they underwent PCNL, stone burden, the presence of staghorn stone, size of sheath used at percutaneous access, the presence of bleeding during surgery, and treatment success status. For categorical variables, percentages were calculated and differences between the four groups were tested by the chi-square test.

Results

The only significant difference reported between the matched pairs was between NT and stent only groups. NT only PCNL was associated with significantly longer operating times (p = 0.029) and longer hospital stay (p < 0.001) than stent only PCNL.

Conclusions

Patients who undergo PCNL with less invasive exit strategy involving a stent only have shorter hospital stay than those who have postoperative NT. The intraoperative course is the primary driver of complications in PCNL and not necessarily the exit strategy.

TachoSil(®) sealed tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy to reduce urine leakage and bleeding: outcome of a randomized controlled study

PURPOSE

We determined the efficacy and safety of TachoSil(®) in sealing the tract after percutaneous nephrolithotomy compared to nephrostomy tube placement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 100 consecutive patients scheduled for percutaneous nephrolithotomy were randomized 1:1 to receive a 16Fr nephrostomy tube (group 1) or TachoSil in the tract (group 2). All patients received a mono-J ureteral catheter. The primary study end points were bleeding and urinary leakage rates. The secondary end points were pain as assessed by the 0 to 10-point visual analog scale, analgesic requirement and hospital stay.

RESULTS

The groups were comparable for preoperative and operative variables. In group 1, 3 patients were excluded intraoperatively because of relevant bleeding, and in group 2, 1 patient was excluded intraoperatively because of hydrothorax. Tract complications were significantly more frequent in group 1 than in group 2 (25.5% vs 2%, p <0.001). However, the difference in urinary leakage reached statistical significance (19.1% vs 2%, p = 0.007), whereas that in perirenal hematoma formation did not (6.4% vs 0%, p = 0.113). There was no difference between the groups in mean ± SD number of analgesic doses (1.17 ± 1.56 vs 1.20 ± 1.69, p = 0.791) and visual analogue scale scores (4.77 ± 2.28 vs 4.24 ± 2.32, p = 0.270). Postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in group 2 than in group 1 (5.15 ± 1.74 vs 2.75 ± 1.78 days, p <0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although failing to reduce pain and analgesic requirement, TachoSil provided better tract control and a shorter hospital stay than nephrostomy tube placement, thus allowing the extension of indications for tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy to most procedures.