4.1 Article

Early Removal of Double-J Stents Decreases Urinary Tract Infections in Living Donor Renal Transplantation: A Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial

期刊

TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS
卷 49, 期 2, 页码 297-302

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2016.12.007

关键词

-

资金

  1. Major State Basic Research Development Program of China [2013CB530800]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. The optimal timing for stent removal after renal transplantation remains controversial. This article describes an interim analysis of a randomized, prospective, double-blind trial aimed at detecting differences in urological complications between early ureteral stent removal at 1 week and routine ureteral stent removal at 4 weeks. Methods. Between October 2010 and March 2015, 103 patients who underwent living donor renal transplantation at a single center were pre-operatively randomly assigned to the early ureteral stent removal (at 1 week) group or the routine ureteral stent removal (at 4 weeks) group. Urinary symptoms, auxiliary examination results, and obstruction events were recorded during 3 months of follow-up. A cost analysis of both the hospitalization and postoperative periods was discussed. Results. In total, 52 patients in the 1-week stent group and 51 patients in the 4-week stent group were analyzed. No serious adverse events were reported. Three episodes of urinary tract infections (UTIs) occurred in the 1-week stent group, and 18 such episodes were recorded in the 4-week stent group (5.8% vs 29.4%; P =.002). After adjusting for age, sex, ischemia time, renal artery number, body mass index, multiple arteries, and associated medical illness, regression analysis indicated that only stent duration was associated with UTI (OR, 8.791; 95% CI, 1.984-38.943; P =.004). Conclusions. The results of our study demonstrate that ureteral stent removal at 1 week reduces the risk of UTIs compared with routine removal at 4 weeks. Similar effects of ureteral stent removal on complication rates are observed for these two removal times.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据