Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy—The New Standard of Care?

Zilberman, Dorit E.; Lipkin, Michael; Rosette, Jean J. de la; Ferrandino, Michael N.; Mamoulakis, Charalampos; Laguna, M. Pilar; Preminger, Glenn M.

doi:10.1016/j.juro.2010.06.020

Cited by 85 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Zilberman et al reviewed the papers about tubeless PCNL. They reported similar results with tubeless PCNL compared to standard PCNL (6). With this approach, the target is to achieve less hospital days, less pain scores, less analgesics, faster return to normal activities and lower costs.…”

Section: Commentsmentioning

confidence: 76%

The comparison of standard and tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures

Nalbant¹,

Öztürk²,

Şener³

et al. 2012

Int. braz j urol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Commentsmentioning

confidence: 76%

The comparison of standard and tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures

Nalbant¹,

Öztürk²,

Şener³

et al. 2012

Int. braz j urol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Karami et al reported their 5-year experience with tubeless PCNL in 201 patients and indicated that it can be done safely in kidney stones larger than 2 cm as well as in staghorn stones (15). In a review article that was done by Zilberman et al it was shown that tubeless PCNL has some advantages such as less pain, less debilitation, less costs, and a quicker recovery in all patient groups including children and obese patients (16). Istanbulluoglu et al used an externalized ureteral catheter instead of double j stent in tubeless patients to reduce the morbidity caused by stents and to omit the requirement of cystoscopy for its removal (17).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Totally Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Comparison with Tubeless and Standard Methods

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The study aimed to compare tubeless, totally tubeless, and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) in a tertiary center with selected patient population. Methods: Between September 2013 and March 2015, percutaneous nephrolithotomy was performed on 216 patients in our center. Patients without massive bleeding, calyceal perforation, and residual fragments smaller than 4 mm were enrolled in this study. The patients were divided into 3 groups. In the first group (n = 68), we placed nephrostomy and kept ureteral catheter for 24 hours (the standard group). In second the group (n = 69), no nephrostomy was inserted and ureteral catheter was removed in the operation room (the totally tubeless group) and in the third group (n = 79), no nephrostomy catheter was placed but antegrade DJ stent was inserted intraoperatively (the tubeless group). Three groups were compared with respect to age, analgesic requirement, BMI, length of stay, pain, and stone size. Results: No significant differences were found in the mean stone size, operation time, transfusion rates, and hemoglobin level change between the groups. However, hospitalization time, the amount of narcotic usage, and pain were significantly lower in the second group compared to the other groups (P < 0.05). Conclusions: In patients with no major intraoperative bleeding and calyceal perforation, the totally tubeless approach is safe with decreased pain, analgesia requirement, and hospital stay.

show abstract

“…Bir meta-analizde; çoklu akses yapılması, peroperatif aktif kanama gözlenmesi, belirgin toplayıcı sistem perforasyonu olması, intratorasik yaralanma ihtimali ve sekonder taş hastalarında nefrostomi tüpü konulmasını tavsiye edilmiştir. 9 Isac ve ark.nın çalışmasında tüm hastalarına tüplü PNL yapan bir cerrah ile tüm hastalarına tüpsüz PNL yapan başka bir cerrahin hastaları karşılaştırılmış ve gruplar arasında anlamlı farklılık gözlenmemiştir. Araştırmacılar sadece sekonder PNL yapılacak hastalarda tüp konulmasını önermişlerdir.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified