Comparison between Double J (DJ) Ureteral Stenting and Percutaneous Nephrostomy (PCN) in Obstructive Uropathy

Iftikhar Ahmad, Mudassar Saeed Pansota, Muhammad Tariq, Muhammad Shahzad Saleem, Shafqat Ali Tabassum, Akbar Hussain, Iftikhar Ahmad, Mudassar Saeed Pansota, Muhammad Tariq, Muhammad Shahzad Saleem, Shafqat Ali Tabassum, Akbar Hussain

Abstract

Objective: To compare the complications rate of percutaneous nephrostomy and double J ureteral stenting in the management of obstructive uropathy.

Methodology: Total number of 300 patients of age 20-80 years who underwent JJ stenting or percutaneous nephrostomy for obstructive uropathy were included in this study. Patients were divided in two groups i.e. A & B. In group A, 100 patients who underwent double J ureteral stenting while in group B, 200 patients who underwent percutaneous nephrostomy tube insertion were included. The stent was inserted retrograde by using cystoscope, under mild sedation or local anesthesia. While the percutaneous nephrostomy was done under ultrasound guidance by using local anesthetic agent. Complications were noted in immediate post-operative period and on follow up.

Results: Majority of the patients were between 36 to 50 years of age with male to female ratio was 2.6:1. The most common cause of obstructive uropathy was stone disease i.e. renal, ureteric or both. Post DJ stent, complications like painful trigon irritation, septicemia, haematuria and stent encrustation were seen in 12.0%, 7.0%, 10.0% and 5.0% patients respectively. On the other hand, post-PCN septicemia, bleeding and tube dislodgment or blockage was seen in 3.5%, 4.5% and 4.5% respectively. In this study, overall success rate for double J stenting was up to 83.0% and for percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) was 92.0% (p<0.0001).

Conclusion: Percutaneous nephrostomy is a safe and better method of temporary urinary diversion than double J stenting for management of obstructive uropathy with lower incidence of complications.

Keywords: Complications rate; Double J stenting; Obstructive uropathy; Percutaneous nephrostomy.

Figures

Fig.1
Fig.1
Success rate of both groups

References

    1. Khan SZ, Fahim F, Mansoor K. Obstructive Uropathy: causes and outcome in pediatric patients. J Postgrad Med Inst. 2012;26(2):176–82.
    1. Naeem M, Jan MA, Ullah A, Ali L, Khan S, Amin-ul-Haq , et al. Percutaneous nephrostomy for the relief of upper urinary tract obstruction: an experience with 200 cases. JPMI. 2010;24(2):147–52.
    1. Wong LM, Cleeve LK, Milner AD, Pitman AG. Malignant ureteral obstruction: outcomes after intervention. Have things changed? J Urol. 2007;178(1):178–83.
    1. Radecka E, Magnusson M, Magnusson A. Survival time and period of catheterization in patients treated with percutaneous nephrostomy for urinary obstruction due to malignancy. Acta Radiol. 2006;47(3):328–331.
    1. Wilson JR, Urwin GH, Stower MJ. The role of percutaneous nephrostomy in malignant ureteric obstruction. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2005;87:21–4.
    1. Olivera ST, Gjulsen S, Katica Z. Obstructive Nephropathy as a Result of Malignant Neoplasms: A Single Centre Experience. BANTAO J. 2010;8(2):71–4.
    1. Ku JH, Lee SW, Jeon HG, Kim HH, Oh SJ. Percutaneous nephrostomy versus indwelling ureteral stents in the management of extrinsic ureteral obstruction in advanced malignancies: are there differences. Urology. 2004;64:895–9.
    1. Richter S, Ringel A, Shalev , Nissenkorm I. The Indwelling Ureteric Stent: a ‘friendly’ procedure with unfriendly high morbidity. BJU Intl. 2009;85(4):408–11.
    1. Ivica S‚ Dragan S. Long-term indwelling double-J stents: bulky kidney and urinary bladder calculosis, spontaneous intraperitoneal perforation of the kidney and peritonitis as a result of “forgotten” double-J stent. Vojnosanit Pregl. 2009;66(3):242–4.
    1. Baishya RK, Dhawan DR, Jagtap J, Sabnis R, Desai MR. Percutaneous nephrostomy under ultrasound guidance. Indian J Nephrol. 2011;21(1)
    1. Karim R, Sengupta S, Samanta S, Aich RK, Das U, Deb P. Percutaneous nephrostomy by direct puncture technique: An observational study. Indian J Nephrol. 2010;20(2):84–8.
    1. Memon NA, Talpur AA, Memon JM. Indications and Complications of Indwelling Ureteral Stenting at NMCH, Nawabshah. Pak J of Surg. 2007;23(3):187–91.
    1. Chang HC, Tang SH, Chuang FP, Wu ST, Sun GH, Yu DS, et al. Comparison between the use of percutaneous nephrostomy and internal ureteral stenting in the management of long-term ureteral obstructions. Urol Sci. 2012;23(3):82–4.
    1. Nariculam J, Murphy DG, Jenner C, Sellars N, Gwyther S, Gordon SG, et al. Nephrostomy insertion for patients with bilateral ureteric obstruction caused by prostate cancer. The British J of Radiol. 2009;82:571–6.
    1. Wah TM, Weston MJ, Irving HC. Percutaneous nephrostomy insertion: outcome data from a prospective multi-operator study at a UK training centre. Clin Radiol. 2004;59:255–61.
    1. Shao Y, Zhuo J, Sun XW, Wen W, Liu HT, Xia SJ. Nonstented versus routine stented ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy: a prospective randomized trial. Urol Res. 2008;36:259–63.
    1. Arshad M, Shah SS, Abbasi MH. Applications and complications of polyurethane stenting in urology. J Ayub Med Coll Abbott. 2006;18(2):69–72.
    1. Jalbani MH, Deenari RA, Dholia KR, Oad AK, Arbani IA. Role of Percutaneous Nephrostomy (PCN) in Malignant Ureteral Obstruction. J Pak Med Assoc. 2010;60(4):280–3.
    1. Romero FR, Broglio M, Pires SR, Roca RF, Guibu IA, Perez MD. Indications for percutaneous nephrostomy in patients with obstructive uropathy due to malignant urogenital neoplasia. International Braz J Urol. 2005;31(2):117–24.
    1. Elmalik K, Chowdhury MM, Caps SNJ. Ureteric stents in pyeloplasty: a help or a hindrance. J Peadiatr Urol. 2008;4(4):275–9.
    1. Damiano R, Olivia A, Esposito C, Desio M, Autorino R, D’Armiento M. Early and late complications of double pigtail ureteral stent. Urol Intl. 2002;69:136–40.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever