Postoperative events and complications of next-day stent removal following uncomplicated percutaneous nephrolithotomy compared to longer stenting

Authors

  • Taylor Goodstein Ohio State University Medical Center
  • Patrick Mershon Ohio State University Medical Center
  • Tasha Posid Ohio State University Medical Center
  • Aliza Khuhro Ohio State University Medical Center
  • Mary Charleton Ohio State University Medical Center
  • Amara Ndumele Ohio State University Medical Center
  • Colin Kleinguetl Ohio State University Medical Center
  • Chase Arnold Ohio State University Medical Center
  • Bodo Knudsen Ohio State University Medical Center
  • Michael W. Sourial Ohio State University Medical Center

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.8364

Keywords:

percutaneous nephrolithotomy, stent, outcomes

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Options for renal drainage after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) vary and depend primarily on surgeon preference and case considerations. In our practice, patients traditionally returned one week postoperatively to remove the stents in the office via cystoscopy; however, following uncomplicated PCNL with no plans for second-look procedure, a ureteral stent on a tether is currently removed in tandem with the Foley catheter on postoperative day 1 (POD1) prior to patient discharge. This study compared the number of postoperative events between POD1 stent removal and their longer stented counterparts.

METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review on all patients who had undergone PCNL at our institution from January 1, 2020, to June 31, 2021. Patient demographics, operative metrics, and postoperative events (telephone calls, emergency department [ED]/clinic visits, and complications) were recorded and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS: A total of 243 patients were included in final analysis: 46% (n=111) had their stent removed on POD1 and 54% (n=132) had longer indwelling stent times. Baseline demographics were similar between the two groups. Number of telephone calls (p=0.081), ED/clinic visits (p=0.093), and complications (p=0.647) were similar between groups. There were three (1.3%) unplanned second-look procedures: two (1.8%) in the POD1 stent removal group and one (0.8%, p=0.475) in the later stent removal group.

CONCLUSIONS: In this limited, retrospective study, we did not detect a difference in postoperative events or short-term complications for POD1 vs. later stent removal after uncomplicated PCNL.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2023-08-03

How to Cite

Goodstein, T. ., Mershon, P. ., Posid, T. ., Khuhro, A. ., Charleton, M. ., Ndumele, A. ., Kleinguetl, C. ., Arnold, C. ., Knudsen, B. ., & Sourial, M. W. (2023). Postoperative events and complications of next-day stent removal following uncomplicated percutaneous nephrolithotomy compared to longer stenting. Canadian Urological Association Journal, 17(11), E381–7. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.8364

Issue

Vol. 17 No. 11 (2023): CUAJ November

Section

Original Research

License

You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:

  • Post the Article on any Web site
  • Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.

The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.

You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.

The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:

  • That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
  • That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
  • That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
  • That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.