Percutaneous nephrostomy vs ureteral stent for hydronephrosis secondary to ureteric calculi: impact on spontaneous stone passage and health-related quality of life—a prospective study

31Citations
Citations of this article
58Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Ureteral calculi can be associated with urinary drainage blockage, requiring urinary diversion with percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) or retrograde ureteral stent (RUS). Currently no evidence exists to support the superiority of one method over the other. This study proposes to compare both approaches regarding the probability of spontaneous stone passage (SSP) and its effect on patient’s quality of life (QoL). A prospective trial was carried out from July to October of 2017. 50 patients were selected with hydronephrosis secondary to ureteral stones requiring urgent urinary diversion and divided into two groups according to diversion technique: percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) or retrograde ureteral stent (RUS). The rate of SSP and QoL were evaluated. A PCN group (18 patients) and a RUS group (32 patients) were set. Stone size was higher in PCN (median 92 mm2) than RUS (median 47 mm2) (p =.012). The rate of SSP was 25% in RUS group and 38.9% in PCN. On the univariable analysis no statistical effect was found; however, when adjusted for stone size, location, previous ureteral manipulation and expulsive therapy, PCN showed a significant higher chance of SSP than RUS (OR = 6667). Besides, it was found that 30.2% (n = 13) of stones had an upward displacement associated with retrograde endoscopy. A significant decrease between pre- and post-intervention QoL was found with RUS (p

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

de Sousa Morais, N., Pereira, J. P., Mota, P., Carvalho-Dias, E., Torres, J. N., & Lima, E. (2019). Percutaneous nephrostomy vs ureteral stent for hydronephrosis secondary to ureteric calculi: impact on spontaneous stone passage and health-related quality of life—a prospective study. Urolithiasis, 47(6), 567–573. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-018-1078-2

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free