Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

Title abbreviation: Adv Clin Exp Med
JCR Impact Factor (IF) – 2.1 (5-Year IF – 2.0)
Journal Citation Indicator (JCI) (2023) – 0.4
Scopus CiteScore – 3.7 (CiteScore Tracker – 4.1)
Index Copernicus  – 171.00; MNiSW – 70 pts

ISSN 1899–5276 (print)
ISSN 2451-2680 (online)
Periodicity – monthly

Download original text (EN)

Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

2018, vol. 27, nr 10, October, p. 1411–1416

doi: 10.17219/acem/71196

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

A non-inferiority study to analyze the safety of totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Piotr Bryniarski1,A,B,C,D,E,F, Paweł Rajwa1,B, Marcin Życzkowski1,C, Piotr Taborowski1,D, Zbigniew Kaletka1,E, Andrzej Paradysz1,E,F

1 Department of Urology, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland

Abstract

Background. Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (ttPCNL) becomes increasingly frequently utilized in the treatment of kidney stones. This procedure emerged as an answer for patients’ needs to minimize hospitalization time, pain intensity and discomfort due to nephrostomy tube. However, ttPCNL may be less safe for patients, as without nephrostomy tube bleeding from renal vessels is potentially more severe.
Objectives. The purpose of our study was to retrospectively evaluate the safety parameters of ttPCNL collected in a prospective manner.
Material and Methods. This was a single tertiary care center, non-inferiority study with 2 arms (55 patients in each arm). The 1st group consisted of patients who underwent ttPCNL with the application of TachoSil® (Takeda, Osaka, Japan) as sealing material, while in the 2nd group, conventional PCNL with nephrostomy tube (cPCNL) was utilized. The primary goal was to prove that hemoglobin drop after surgery, as equivalent of safety, was not inferior than 1 g/dL. The secondary endpoints comprised visual analogue scale (VAS) of pain, additional pain treatment and hospital stay.
Results. The mean hemoglobin drop after ttPCNL was insignificantly lower in comparison with cPCNL group (mean: –0.35 g/dL; confidence interval (CI) = –0.8, 0.21). Visual analogue scale of pain and pain treatment were comparable between groups. Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the ttPCNL group.
Conclusion. Totally tubeless PCNL can be considered a safe option after uncomplicated lithotripsy – what is important, it is characterized by a shorter hospitalization time. Postoperatively, pain intensity is comparable between both groups.

Key words

nephrolithiasis, lithotripsy, kidney stones, totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy

References (20)

  1. Türk C, Petřík A, Sarica K, et al. EAU guidelines on interventional treatment for urolithiasis. Eur Urol. 2016;69(3):475–482.
  2. Shah H, Khandkar A, Sodha H, Kharodawala S, Hegde S, Bansal M. Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: 3 years of experience with 454 patients. BJU Int. 2009;104(6):840–846.
  3. Wang J, Zhao C, Zhang C, Fan X, Lin Y, Jiang Q. Tubeless vs standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A meta-analysis. BJU Int. 2012;109(6): 918–924.
  4. Online calculator: Compare 2 Means 2-Sample Non-Inferiority or Superiority. http://powerandsamplesize.com/Calculators/Compare-2-Means/2-Sample-Non-Inferiority-or-Superiority. Accessed December 10, 2016.
  5. Chow S, Shao J, Wang H. Sample Size Calculations in Clinical Research. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC Biostatistics Series; 2008.
  6. Lesaffre E. Superiority, equivalence, and non-inferiority trials. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2008;66(2):150–154.
  7. Liatsikos EN, Hom D, Dinlenz CZ, et al. Tail stent versus re-entry tube: A randomized comparison after percutaneous stone extraction. ­Urology. 2002;59:15–19.
  8. Bryniarski P, Bogacki R, Muskała B, Taborowski P, Paradysz A. Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Videourology. 2016;30:vid.2016.0023. doi:10.1089/vid.2016.0023
  9. Pocock SJ. The pros and cons of noninferiority trials. Fundam Clin Pharmacol. 2003;17(4):483–490.
  10. D’Agostino RB, Massaro JM, Sullivan LM. Non-inferiority trials, design concepts and issues – the encounters of academic consultants in statistics. Stat Med. 2003;22(2):169–186.
  11. Fueglistaler P, Adamina M, Guller U. Non-inferiority trials in surgical oncology. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(5):1532–1539.
  12. Patel AB, Reyes A, Ackland GL. Non-inferiority of retrospective data collection for assessing perioperative morbidity. PeerJ. 2015;3:e1466.
  13. Deng C, Chen J, Hanna K. Retrospective assessment of non-inferiority in the rare disease, Guillain-Barre syndrome. Biom Biostat Int J. 2014;1(2):00009. doi:10.15406/bbij.2014.01.00009
  14. Lee DI, Uribe C, Eichel L, et al. Sealing percutaneous nephrolithotomy tracts with gelatin matrix hemostatic sealant: Initial clinical use. J Urol. 2004;171:575–578.
  15. Cormio L, Perrone A, Di Fino G, et al. TachoSil(®) sealed tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy to reduce urine leakage and bleeding: Outcome of a randomized controlled study. J Urol. 2012;188(1):145–150.
  16. Karami H, Gholamrezaie HR. Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy in selected patients. J Endourol. 2004;18(5):475–476.
  17. Aghamir SM, Hosseini SR, Gooran S. Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol. 2004;18(7):647–648.
  18. Yates DR, Safdar RK, Spencer PA, Parys BT. “Nephrostomy-free” percutaneous nephrolithotomy: Experience in a UK district general hospital. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2009;91(7):570–577.
  19. Mishra S, Sabnis RB, Kurien A, Ganpule A, Muthu V, Desai M. Questioning the wisdom of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL): A prospective randomized controlled study of early tube removal vs tubeless PCNL. BJU Int. 2010;106:1045–1048.
  20. Li R, Louie MK, Lee HJ, et al. Prospective randomized trial of three different methods of nephrostomy tract closure after percutaneous nephrolithotripsy. BJU Int. 2011;107:1660–1665.
© Wroclaw Medical University