Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a prospective randomized controlled study

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Urological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to perform a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the role, safety, and effectiveness of totally tubeless PCNL and whether this procedure is less morbid in terms of analgesia requirement, related complications and convalescence. A total of 131 patients, with impacted ureteropelvic junction stone or single renal pelvic stone larger than 20 mm, were prospectively randomized (using random numbers table) into two groups, and underwent conventional (63 patients) or totally tubeless (68 patients) PCNL. Preoperative data included urinalysis, urine culture, complete blood count, biochemistry study, renal ultrasonography, intravenous urography and Tc 99m DTPA clearance for determination of selective glomerular filtration rate. Intraoperative findings, operative time, and outcome were also recorded. All patients were followed regularly at clinic every 3 months during year 1 and every 6 months, thereafter, and Tc 99m DTPA clearance for the determination of selective glomerular filtration rate, renal ultrasonography and intravenous urography was performed to assess the kidney function 6 months later. There was no difference between the groups with regard to serum creatinine change, hemoglobin decrease, morphology improvement, resumption of normal activity and complication grading. The length of stay, pain visual analog scale and analgesic requirements favored the tubeless group with statistical significance. There was significant statistical difference in relative perfusion rate between preoperative and postoperative in both groups. This trial demonstrates that totally tubeless PCNL is safe and well tolerated in selected patients and associated with decreases in length of stay, postoperative pain and analgesia requirement. Most importantly, patients undergoing uncomplicated PCNL are not mandated to have a nephrostomy or ureteral stent placed for specific indications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6, 336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2):205–213

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Morris DS, Wei JT, Taub DA, Dunn RL, Wolf JS Jr, Hollenbeck BK (2006) Temporary trends in the use of percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Urol 175:1731–1736

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Schulze H, Hertle L, Kulta A, Graff J, Senge T (1989) Critical evaluation of treatment of staghorn calculi by percutaneous nephrolithotomy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 141:822–825

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Goh M, Wolf J Jr (1999) Almost totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: further evaluation of the technique. J Endourol 13:177–180

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Limb J, Bellman GC (2002) Tubeless percutaneous renal surgery: review of first 112 patients. Urology 59:527–531

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Harmon WJ, Sershon PD, Blute ML, Patterson DE, Segura JW (1997) Ureteroscopy: current practice and long-term complications. J Urol 157:28–32

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Pollard SG, MacFarlane R (1988) Symptoms arising from double-J ureteral stents. J Urol 139:37–38

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Bregg K, Riehle RA (1989) Morbidity associated with indwelling internal ureteral stents after shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 141:510–512

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Pryor JL, Langley MJ, Jenkins AD (1991) Comparison of symptom characteristics of indwelling ureteral catheters. J Urol 145:719–722

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Joshi HB, Stainthorpe A, MacDonagh RP, Keeley FX Jr, Timoney AG (2003) Indwelling ureteral stents: evaluation of symptoms, quality of life and utility. J Urol 169:1065–1069

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Jou YC, Cheng MC, Sheen JH, Lin CT, Chen PC (2004) Electrocauterization of bleeding points for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Urology 64:443–447

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Troxel SA, Low RK (2002) Renal intrapelvic pressure during percutaneous nephrolithotomy and its correlation with the development of postoperative fever. J Urol 168:1348–1351

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Noller MW, Baughman SM, Morey AF, Auge BK (2004) Fibrin sealant enables tubeless percutaneous stone surgery. J Urol 172:166–169

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lee DI, Uribe C, Eichel L et al (2004) Sealing percutaneous nephrolithotomy tracts with gelatin matrix hemostatic sealant initial clinical use. J Urol 171:575–578

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Aghamir SM, Khazaeli MH, Meisami A (2006) Use of Surgicel for sealing nephrostomy tract after totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 20:293–295

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Kijvikai K, Leenanupunth C, Sirisriro R, Lertsithichai P (2004) Comparative study of renal function between standard and modified anatrophic nephrolithotomy by radionuclide renal scans. J Med Assoc Thai 87(6):704–708

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Shokeir AA, Gad HM, El-Diasty T (2003) Role of radioisotope renal scans in the choice of nephrectomy side in live kidney donors. J Urol 170:373–376

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Al-Kohlany KM, Shokeir AA, Moshbah A et al (2005) Treatment of complete staghorn stones : a prospective randomized comparision of open surgery versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Urol 173:469–473

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gupta S, Wadhwa P, Minocha VR (2002) Renal function response following Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients of renal stone disease with impaired renal function. Indian J Nucl Med 17(1):18–20

    Google Scholar 

  26. Gad HM, Kenawy M, Shoma AM, Elhawary AM(2002) Quantitative and qualitative evaluation of renal function and parenchymal abnormalities following surgical stone removal. Abstracts of the 30th Annual Meeting of the British Nuclear Medicine Society. 23(4):390

  27. Koga S, Arakaki Y, Matsuoka M, Ohyama C (1991) Staghorn calculi–Long-term Results of Management. BJU 68(2):122–124

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Streem SB, Yost A, Mascha E (1996) Clinical implications of clinically insignificant stone fragments after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 155:1186–1190

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Lingeman JE, Siegel YI, Steele B, Nyhuis AW, Woods JR (1994) Management of lower pole nephrolithiasis: acritical analysis. J Urol 151:663–667

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Albala DM, Assimos DG, Clayman RV et al (2001) Lower pole I: a prospective randomized trial of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrostolithotomy for lower pole nephrolithiasis-initial results. J Urol 166:2072–2080

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Saint Martin De Porres Hospital, Chiayi, Taiwan, R.O.C

    Chien-Hsing Chang, Chung-Jing Wang & Shi-Wei Huang

Authors
  1. Chien-Hsing Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chung-Jing Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shi-Wei Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chung-Jing Wang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chang, CH., Wang, CJ. & Huang, SW. Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a prospective randomized controlled study. Urol Res 39, 459–465 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-011-0363-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-011-0363-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation