A Comparison of Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Does Tubeless Realy Superior? A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study

Aim: We aimed to compare patient groups who underwent either a standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) or tubeless PNL for safety, effectiveness and patient comfort. Material and Methods: 78 patients were included in the study. Patients who underwent the standard PNL (n=38) or tubeless PNL (n=4...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Huseyin KOCAKGOL, Senol ADANUR, Ali Haydar YİLMAZ, Fatih OZKAYA, İbrahim KARABULUT, Ozkan POLAT
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Ali İhsan Taşçı 2019-10-01
Series:Yeni Üroloji Dergisi
Subjects:
Online Access:https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/yud/issue/47273/508649
id doaj-6b3995fcc8484185b8473aa5c0db90aa
record_format Article
spelling doaj-6b3995fcc8484185b8473aa5c0db90aa2020-11-25T03:20:10ZengAli İhsan TaşçıYeni Üroloji Dergisi1305-24892687-19552019-10-0114316016510.33719/yud.508649A Comparison of Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Does Tubeless Realy Superior? A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind StudyHuseyin KOCAKGOL0https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7683-3282Senol ADANUR1https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2508-199XAli Haydar YİLMAZ2https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5797-0655Fatih OZKAYA3https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7776-4231İbrahim KARABULUT4https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6766-0191Ozkan POLAT5https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9961-662XKanuni Training and Research Hospital, Department of Urology, Trabzon, TurkeyDepartment of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Ataturk University, Erzurum, TurkeyBilecik State Hospital, Department of Urology, Bilecik, TurkeyAtaturk University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Urology,TurkeyHealth Sciences University, Erzurum Training and Research Hospital, Department of Urology, TurkeyAtaturk University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Urology,TurkeyAim: We aimed to compare patient groups who underwent either a standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) or tubeless PNL for safety, effectiveness and patient comfort. Material and Methods: 78 patients were included in the study. Patients who underwent the standard PNL (n=38) or tubeless PNL (n=40) were randomized into Groups 1 and 2, respectively. This study was designed as a prospective, randomized, double-blind investigation. Patients who had active bleeding at the end of the operation and those with multiple access tracts were excluded from the study. To evaluate postoperative pain and complications, a visual analogue scale (VAS) and a modified Clavien classification were used, respectively. Results: A statistically significant difference was not found between the two patient groups for demographic data (age and gender), or for size, laterality, and intrarenal location of the stone(s) (p>0.05). Perioperative data, including operative and fluoroscopy times and stone‑free rates, perioperative changes in creatinine and haemoglobin values, blood transfusion, VAS 2 to 3 pain scores, analgesic requirements, fever and complications requiring additional surgical treatment were not statistically different between groups (p>0.05). A VAS 1 pain score and hospital stays were significantly decreased in the tubeless PNL group (p=0.003). Conclusions: Tubeless PNL surgery is an effective and safe endourological procedure that can be performed by experienced surgeons. Its advantages over standard PNL include less pain during the early postoperative period, shorter hospital stays but the rates of complications are not significantly lower.https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/yud/issue/47273/508649renal stonespercutaneous nephrolithotomystandard pnltubeless pnlpainhospitalization time
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Huseyin KOCAKGOL
Senol ADANUR
Ali Haydar YİLMAZ
Fatih OZKAYA
İbrahim KARABULUT
Ozkan POLAT
spellingShingle Huseyin KOCAKGOL
Senol ADANUR
Ali Haydar YİLMAZ
Fatih OZKAYA
İbrahim KARABULUT
Ozkan POLAT
A Comparison of Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Does Tubeless Realy Superior? A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study
Yeni Üroloji Dergisi
renal stones
percutaneous nephrolithotomy
standard pnl
tubeless pnl
pain
hospitalization time
author_facet Huseyin KOCAKGOL
Senol ADANUR
Ali Haydar YİLMAZ
Fatih OZKAYA
İbrahim KARABULUT
Ozkan POLAT
author_sort Huseyin KOCAKGOL
title A Comparison of Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Does Tubeless Realy Superior? A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study
title_short A Comparison of Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Does Tubeless Realy Superior? A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study
title_full A Comparison of Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Does Tubeless Realy Superior? A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study
title_fullStr A Comparison of Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Does Tubeless Realy Superior? A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study
title_full_unstemmed A Comparison of Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Does Tubeless Realy Superior? A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study
title_sort comparison of standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy and tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: does tubeless realy superior? a prospective randomized double-blind study
publisher Ali İhsan Taşçı
series Yeni Üroloji Dergisi
issn 1305-2489
2687-1955
publishDate 2019-10-01
description Aim: We aimed to compare patient groups who underwent either a standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) or tubeless PNL for safety, effectiveness and patient comfort. Material and Methods: 78 patients were included in the study. Patients who underwent the standard PNL (n=38) or tubeless PNL (n=40) were randomized into Groups 1 and 2, respectively. This study was designed as a prospective, randomized, double-blind investigation. Patients who had active bleeding at the end of the operation and those with multiple access tracts were excluded from the study. To evaluate postoperative pain and complications, a visual analogue scale (VAS) and a modified Clavien classification were used, respectively. Results: A statistically significant difference was not found between the two patient groups for demographic data (age and gender), or for size, laterality, and intrarenal location of the stone(s) (p>0.05). Perioperative data, including operative and fluoroscopy times and stone‑free rates, perioperative changes in creatinine and haemoglobin values, blood transfusion, VAS 2 to 3 pain scores, analgesic requirements, fever and complications requiring additional surgical treatment were not statistically different between groups (p>0.05). A VAS 1 pain score and hospital stays were significantly decreased in the tubeless PNL group (p=0.003). Conclusions: Tubeless PNL surgery is an effective and safe endourological procedure that can be performed by experienced surgeons. Its advantages over standard PNL include less pain during the early postoperative period, shorter hospital stays but the rates of complications are not significantly lower.
topic renal stones
percutaneous nephrolithotomy
standard pnl
tubeless pnl
pain
hospitalization time
url https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/yud/issue/47273/508649
work_keys_str_mv AT huseyinkocakgol acomparisonofstandardpercutaneousnephrolithotomyandtubelesspercutaneousnephrolithotomydoestubelessrealysuperioraprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
AT senoladanur acomparisonofstandardpercutaneousnephrolithotomyandtubelesspercutaneousnephrolithotomydoestubelessrealysuperioraprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
AT alihaydaryilmaz acomparisonofstandardpercutaneousnephrolithotomyandtubelesspercutaneousnephrolithotomydoestubelessrealysuperioraprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
AT fatihozkaya acomparisonofstandardpercutaneousnephrolithotomyandtubelesspercutaneousnephrolithotomydoestubelessrealysuperioraprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
AT ibrahimkarabulut acomparisonofstandardpercutaneousnephrolithotomyandtubelesspercutaneousnephrolithotomydoestubelessrealysuperioraprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
AT ozkanpolat acomparisonofstandardpercutaneousnephrolithotomyandtubelesspercutaneousnephrolithotomydoestubelessrealysuperioraprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
AT huseyinkocakgol comparisonofstandardpercutaneousnephrolithotomyandtubelesspercutaneousnephrolithotomydoestubelessrealysuperioraprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
AT senoladanur comparisonofstandardpercutaneousnephrolithotomyandtubelesspercutaneousnephrolithotomydoestubelessrealysuperioraprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
AT alihaydaryilmaz comparisonofstandardpercutaneousnephrolithotomyandtubelesspercutaneousnephrolithotomydoestubelessrealysuperioraprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
AT fatihozkaya comparisonofstandardpercutaneousnephrolithotomyandtubelesspercutaneousnephrolithotomydoestubelessrealysuperioraprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
AT ibrahimkarabulut comparisonofstandardpercutaneousnephrolithotomyandtubelesspercutaneousnephrolithotomydoestubelessrealysuperioraprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
AT ozkanpolat comparisonofstandardpercutaneousnephrolithotomyandtubelesspercutaneousnephrolithotomydoestubelessrealysuperioraprospectiverandomizeddoubleblindstudy
_version_ 1724619092802928640