Cargando…
Double J stent combined with pyelostomy tube in pediatric laparoscopic pyeloplasty: a 5-year clinical experience in a single center
OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcome of using a double J (DJ) stent combined with pyelostomy tube with a DJ stent alone in laparoscopic pyeloplasty (LP) for pediatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients with UPJO treated with LP between January 201...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10634194/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37940873 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-023-01351-1 |
_version_ | 1785132781041352704 |
---|---|
author | Chen, Zhiqiang Wang, Yunjin Wu, Changwei Chen, Hong Cui, Xu Zhou, Chaoming |
author_facet | Chen, Zhiqiang Wang, Yunjin Wu, Changwei Chen, Hong Cui, Xu Zhou, Chaoming |
author_sort | Chen, Zhiqiang |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcome of using a double J (DJ) stent combined with pyelostomy tube with a DJ stent alone in laparoscopic pyeloplasty (LP) for pediatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients with UPJO treated with LP between January 2017 and November 2021 was conducted in our center. According to different postoperative drainage methods patients were divided into a DJ stent group (52 cases) and a DJ stent combined with pyelostomy tube group (combination group, 41 cases). Operative time, bleeding volume, perirenal drainage stent removal time, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, and renal function recovery were compared between the two groups. Renal ultrasound and diuretic renogram (DR) were used for preoperative and postoperative follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 52 patients were in the DJ stent group and 41 patients in the combination group. The mean hospital stay was 6.46 ± 2.66 days in the DJ stent group and 5.22 ± 1.63 days in the combination group (p < 0.05). Postoperative complications developed in 14 out of 52 patients in the DJ stent group (26.9%), while complications developed in 8 out of 41 patients in the combination group (19.5%) (p > 0.05). Non-catheter-related complications developed in 10/52 patients in the DJ stent group (19.2%) and only 1/41 patients in the combination group (2.4%) (p < 0.05). The renal function and renal cortex thickness in both groups were improved. CONCLUSION: Both the DJ stent drainage and the DJ stent combined with pyelostomy drainage are safe and effective. We should fully consider the patient’s preoperative and intraoperative conditions and choose appropriate drainage methods. A DJ stent combined with pyelostomy tube can reduce non-catheter related complications, facilitate postoperative recovery, and the hospital stay was significantly shorter than the DJ stent group. However, it is necessary to pay attention to the nursing treatment of the pyelostomy tube and guard against the occurrence of pyelostomy tube shedding. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10634194 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106341942023-11-10 Double J stent combined with pyelostomy tube in pediatric laparoscopic pyeloplasty: a 5-year clinical experience in a single center Chen, Zhiqiang Wang, Yunjin Wu, Changwei Chen, Hong Cui, Xu Zhou, Chaoming BMC Urol Research OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcome of using a double J (DJ) stent combined with pyelostomy tube with a DJ stent alone in laparoscopic pyeloplasty (LP) for pediatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients with UPJO treated with LP between January 2017 and November 2021 was conducted in our center. According to different postoperative drainage methods patients were divided into a DJ stent group (52 cases) and a DJ stent combined with pyelostomy tube group (combination group, 41 cases). Operative time, bleeding volume, perirenal drainage stent removal time, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, and renal function recovery were compared between the two groups. Renal ultrasound and diuretic renogram (DR) were used for preoperative and postoperative follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 52 patients were in the DJ stent group and 41 patients in the combination group. The mean hospital stay was 6.46 ± 2.66 days in the DJ stent group and 5.22 ± 1.63 days in the combination group (p < 0.05). Postoperative complications developed in 14 out of 52 patients in the DJ stent group (26.9%), while complications developed in 8 out of 41 patients in the combination group (19.5%) (p > 0.05). Non-catheter-related complications developed in 10/52 patients in the DJ stent group (19.2%) and only 1/41 patients in the combination group (2.4%) (p < 0.05). The renal function and renal cortex thickness in both groups were improved. CONCLUSION: Both the DJ stent drainage and the DJ stent combined with pyelostomy drainage are safe and effective. We should fully consider the patient’s preoperative and intraoperative conditions and choose appropriate drainage methods. A DJ stent combined with pyelostomy tube can reduce non-catheter related complications, facilitate postoperative recovery, and the hospital stay was significantly shorter than the DJ stent group. However, it is necessary to pay attention to the nursing treatment of the pyelostomy tube and guard against the occurrence of pyelostomy tube shedding. BioMed Central 2023-11-08 /pmc/articles/PMC10634194/ /pubmed/37940873 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-023-01351-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Chen, Zhiqiang Wang, Yunjin Wu, Changwei Chen, Hong Cui, Xu Zhou, Chaoming Double J stent combined with pyelostomy tube in pediatric laparoscopic pyeloplasty: a 5-year clinical experience in a single center |
title | Double J stent combined with pyelostomy tube in pediatric laparoscopic pyeloplasty: a 5-year clinical experience in a single center |
title_full | Double J stent combined with pyelostomy tube in pediatric laparoscopic pyeloplasty: a 5-year clinical experience in a single center |
title_fullStr | Double J stent combined with pyelostomy tube in pediatric laparoscopic pyeloplasty: a 5-year clinical experience in a single center |
title_full_unstemmed | Double J stent combined with pyelostomy tube in pediatric laparoscopic pyeloplasty: a 5-year clinical experience in a single center |
title_short | Double J stent combined with pyelostomy tube in pediatric laparoscopic pyeloplasty: a 5-year clinical experience in a single center |
title_sort | double j stent combined with pyelostomy tube in pediatric laparoscopic pyeloplasty: a 5-year clinical experience in a single center |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10634194/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37940873 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-023-01351-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chenzhiqiang doublejstentcombinedwithpyelostomytubeinpediatriclaparoscopicpyeloplastya5yearclinicalexperienceinasinglecenter AT wangyunjin doublejstentcombinedwithpyelostomytubeinpediatriclaparoscopicpyeloplastya5yearclinicalexperienceinasinglecenter AT wuchangwei doublejstentcombinedwithpyelostomytubeinpediatriclaparoscopicpyeloplastya5yearclinicalexperienceinasinglecenter AT chenhong doublejstentcombinedwithpyelostomytubeinpediatriclaparoscopicpyeloplastya5yearclinicalexperienceinasinglecenter AT cuixu doublejstentcombinedwithpyelostomytubeinpediatriclaparoscopicpyeloplastya5yearclinicalexperienceinasinglecenter AT zhouchaoming doublejstentcombinedwithpyelostomytubeinpediatriclaparoscopicpyeloplastya5yearclinicalexperienceinasinglecenter |