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 2017...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BMC urology 2023-11, Vol.23 (1), p.1-181, Article 181
Hauptverfasser: Chen, Zhiqiang, Wang, Yunjin, Wu, Changwei, Chen, Hong, Cui, Xu, Zhou, Chaoming
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung: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 [+ or -] 2.66 days in the DJ stent group and 5.22 [+ or -] 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. Keywords: Ureteropelvic junction obstruction(UPJO), Laparoscopic pyeloplasty (LP), Stents, Pyelostomy tube, Complications
ISSN:1471-2490
1471-2490
DOI:10.1186/s12894-023-01351-1