COMPLICATIONS OF PERCUTANEOUS NEPHROSTOMY USING PIGTAIL NEPHROSTOMY TUBE SIZE OF 8 FRENCH VS PEDIATRIC NASOGASTRIC TUBE SIZE OF 8 FRENCH IN UROLITHIASIS PATIENTS IN HASAN SADIKIN HOSPITAL BANDUNG

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

PDF
Published 2018-01-11
Dhika Ari Rizki Tjahjodjati Tjahjodjati

Abstract

Objective: To compare the complications and patient-reported problems using standard pigtail nephrostomy tube versus pediatric nasogastric tube (NGT) usage as nephrostomy tube. Material & Methods: During 2015 period, 79 patients were referred to Urology Department in Hasan Sadikin Hospital Bandung for percutaneous nephrostomy procedure. Data were collected from Medical Record Urology Department to identify the complications and the patients-related problems using standard pigtail nephrostomy tube versus pediatric NGT usage as nephrostomy tube. Results: 38 patients (48%) using pigtail and 41 patients (52%) using pediatric NGT as nephrostomy tube. Overall,12 patients using pigtail nephrostomy tube (31.5%) experienced at least 1 complication related to nephrostomy procedure, and only 7 patients using pediatric NGT (17%) experienced complications. The complications including fever (3 patients), pyuria (5 patients), infection on insertion site (1 patient, 1.2%), pain (7 patients, 8.8%) hematuria (4 patients, 5%) and detached nephrostomy tube (19 patients, 24%). Conclusion: The small number of complications observed in pediatric nasogastric tube patient group suggest that pediatric NGT is a safe, cheap and widely available substitute for pigtail nephrostomy tube.


##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Keywords

Nasogastric tube, percutaneous nephrostomy, pigtail

References

Karim R, Sengupta S, Samanta S, Aich R, Das U, Deb P. Percutaneous nephrostomy by direct puncture technique: An observational study. Indian Journal of Nephrology. 2010; 20(2): 84-88. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0971-4065.65301

Hausegger KA, Portugaller HR. Percutaneous nephrostomy and antegrade ureteral stenting: Technique–indications–complications. European Radiology. 2006; 16(9): 2016-30. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-0136-7

Campbell MF, Wein AJ, Kavoussi LR. Campbell-Walsh Urology, Editor-in-chief, Alan J. Wein; Editors, Louis R. Kavoussi et al. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 2007.

Li AC, Regalado SP. Emergent percutaneous nephrostomy for the diagnosis and management of pyonephrosis. Seminars in Interventional Radiology. 2012; 29(3): 218-25. doi:10.1055/s-0032-1326932.

Hart Chari Y. Complications of percutaneous nephrostomy tube placement to treat nephrolothiasis; 2002. p. 43-45.

Lewis S. Major complications after percutaneous nephrostomy—lessons from a Department Audit Clinical Radiology. 2004; 59(2): 171-9.

Oguike TC. The use of infant feeding tube as a combined nephrostomy and stent in Anderson-Hynes pyeloplasty. Nigerian Journal of Clinical Practice. June 2007; 2: 166-8.

Section
Articles
Copyright Information
Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine/Airlangga University