These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Ureteroneocystostomy: to drain or not to drain.
    Author: Chow SH, LaSalle MD, Stock JA, Hanna MK.
    Journal: J Urol; 1998 Sep; 160(3 Pt 2):1001-3. PubMed ID: 9719263.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: Indications for the use of external abdominal drains after ureteral reimplantation are not well defined. We determine the nature of the drainage fluid as well as the current use of drains by pediatric urologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively evaluated 15 consecutive patients 7 months to 19 years old who underwent unilateral or bilateral intravesical ureteroneocystostomy for primary vesicoureteral reflux. All patients were treated with a urethral Foley catheter and closed suction Jackson-Pratt abdominal drain. Fluid from the Jackson-Pratt drain and Foley catheter was analyzed for urea and creatinine on postoperative day 1, and compared to serum values. The Foley catheter was removed after the urine became clear, and the Jackson-Pratt drain was removed after drainage was 5 ml. or less for 12 hours. In addition, a questionnaire was distributed to 268 pediatric urologists to determine current practice regarding the use of routine postoperative drains. RESULTS: Urea and creatinine from the Jackson-Pratt drains in all 15 patients were consistent with serum values. The Foley catheter and Jackson-Pratt drain were removed an average of 3 and 4 days postoperatively, respectively. There were 186 responses from the 268 questionnaires distributed (69.4%). Of the pediatric urologists surveyed 70.4% performed intravesical ureteral reimplantation exclusively, 5.9% extravesical reimplantation exclusively and 23.7% both techniques. Of the group surveyed 73.1% placed external abdominal Jackson-Pratt or Penrose drains, although 26.5% of those who routinely used external drains believed that they were probably unnecessary. Of the physicians who placed drains 53.7% believed that the drainage fluid had some component of urine. CONCLUSIONS: In our small prospective study group we demonstrated that external abdominal drainage fluid is consistent with serum despite the popular belief that it may have some component of urine. The gynecological literature has shown repeatedly that there is no increase in morbidity after radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection when no external abdominal drains are used. Although to our knowledge there are no previous reports of drain use after ureteral reimplantation, 26.9% of pediatric urologists currently do not place external abdominal drains with no apparent increase in morbidity. Larger prospective cohorts with long-term followup are needed to address adequately the issue of whether drains are needed after uncomplicated ureteral reimplantation.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]