Comparison of Patients in Whom Double-J Stent Had Been Placed or Not Placed After Renal Transplantation in a Single Center: A Follow-up Study

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorAlci, E.
dc.contributor.authorUstun, M.
dc.contributor.authorSezer, T.
dc.contributor.authorYilmaz, M.
dc.contributor.authorOzdemir, M.
dc.contributor.authorUnsal, M. G.
dc.contributor.authorUguz, A.
dc.contributor.authorSozbilen, M.
dc.contributor.authorToz, H.
dc.contributor.authorHoscoskun, C.
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-27T22:59:58Z
dc.date.available2019-10-27T22:59:58Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.departmentEge Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractBackground. Double-J (DJ) stents play an important role in modern urology to prevent undesirable side effects after surgery. We aimed to investigate the relationship of DJ stents with the demographic characteristics, surgical complications, urinary tract infection (UTI), and hematuria in the patients who underwent renal transplantation (Tx). Methods. Data of 354 patients who underwent renal Tx between 2008 and 2011 at Ege University were evaluated retrospectively; 331 patients were included in this study. The term DJ (-) represents patients in whom a DJ stent was not placed. "Primary DJ term" represents patients in whom the DJ stent was placed during the first Tx. "Secondary DJ term" represents the patients who had DJ after Tx for any complication. Results. Two hundred fifty-four (76.7%) patients were in the DJ (-) group, 52(15.7%) were in the primary DJ group, and 25(7.6%) were in the secondary DJ group. There were significant differences between the groups in terms of anastomosis type (P = .000), stay-in-hospital time (P = .000), surgical complication (P = .000), re-operation (P = .000), percutaneous nephrostomy (P = .000), UTI (P = .000), first-time UTI (P = .000), recurrent UTI (P = .000), positive hemoculture (P = .000), hematuria (P = .000), duration of dialysis before Tx (P = .000), live/deceased donor (P = .000), and delayed graft function (P = .009). Conclusions. Our choice is to use the DJ stent in selected high-risk patients and to keep the indications for DJ stent wider in deceased donor transplants by considering possible surgical complications. The use of the stent only in selected cases will decrease surgical complications due to stent placement.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.transproceed.2015.04.064en_US
dc.identifier.endpage1436en_US
dc.identifier.issn0041-1345
dc.identifier.issn1873-2623
dc.identifier.issue5en_US
dc.identifier.pmid26093736en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ3en_US
dc.identifier.startpage1433en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2015.04.064
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11454/51918
dc.identifier.volume47en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000357066800048en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevier Science Incen_US
dc.relation.ispartofTransplantation Proceedingsen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.titleComparison of Patients in Whom Double-J Stent Had Been Placed or Not Placed After Renal Transplantation in a Single Center: A Follow-up Studyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu