Open AccessPercutaneous nephrolithotomy: Large tube, small tube, tubeless, or totally tubeless?
Author(s) -
Mukul Agrawal,
Monika Agarwal
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
indian journal of urology/indian journal of urology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.333
H-Index - 30
eISSN - 1998-3824
pISSN - 0970-1591
DOI - 10.4103/0970-1591.117285
Subject(s) - medicine , percutaneous nephrolithotomy , surgery , percutaneous , stent , randomized controlled trial , lithotomy position , alternative medicine , pathology
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.