Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Author Reply
Book Review
Brief Communication
Case Report
Case Series
Clinical Case Report
Clinicopathological Conference
Commentary
Corrigendum
Editorial
Editorial – World Kidney Day 2016
Editorial Commentary
Erratum
Foreward
Guidelines
Image in Nephrology
Images in Nephrology
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letters to Editor
Literature Review
Notice of Retraction
Obituary
Original Article
Perspective
Research Letter
Retraction Notice
Review
Review Article
Short Review
Special Article
Special Feature
Special Feature - World Kidney Day
Systematic Review
Technical Note
Varia
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Author Reply
Book Review
Brief Communication
Case Report
Case Series
Clinical Case Report
Clinicopathological Conference
Commentary
Corrigendum
Editorial
Editorial – World Kidney Day 2016
Editorial Commentary
Erratum
Foreward
Guidelines
Image in Nephrology
Images in Nephrology
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letters to Editor
Literature Review
Notice of Retraction
Obituary
Original Article
Perspective
Research Letter
Retraction Notice
Review
Review Article
Short Review
Special Article
Special Feature
Special Feature - World Kidney Day
Systematic Review
Technical Note
Varia
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Letters to Editor
21 (
2
); 139-139
doi:
10.4103/0971-4065.82380

Ultrasound-guided percutaneous nephrostomy

Muljibhai Patel Society for Research in Nephrourology, Muljibhai Patel Urological Hospital, Nadiad, Gujarat, India
Address for correspondence: Dr. Arvind P Ganpule, Consultant Urologist, Muljibhai Patel Society for Research in Nephrourology, Muljibhai Patel Urological Hospital, Dr. Virendra Desai Road, Nadiad, Gujarat - 387 001, India. E-mail: doctorarvind1@gmail.com
Licence

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Disclaimer:
This article was originally published by Medknow Publications and was migrated to Scientific Scholar after the change of Publisher.

Sir,

I read with great interest the article by Karim et al.[1] This procedure is a life-saving procedure for scores of obstructive uropathy patients. I commend the authors on presenting their data on the technique. Although the article throws light on the technique and also reiterates a few “known” facts regarding ultrasound-guided percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN), I would like to pose a few questions and make a few comments.

First, the authors’ mention that in all the patients PCN was done in a prone position. This may not be feasible always. It is a known fact that patients with chronic kidney disease, sepsis, pyonephrosis are a group of patients who often are unable to lie in a prone position due to breathlessness and other co-morbidities. In such situations, PCN in a supine position is of benefit. Percutaneous ultrasound access in a supine position is being practiced at our center for gaining access,[2] The ultrasound is of particular benefit in this position as it minimizes the chance of bowel injury. In our experience, ultrasound-guided puncture of the lower and middle calyx is possible in most of these patients. What is the authors experience as regards supine PCN?

Secondly, I feel the tube size that the authors have used (6-8.5 Fr) is suboptimal. Such small caliber nephrostomies tend to block in pyonephrosis. This may be the reason for higher incidence of tube blockage (19%) as noted in this series.

Thirdly, a few comments are there regarding the access. At our center, we always place two bolsters, one below the lower chest and one below the hips in the prone position. We hypothesize that this helps for the bowel to fall away and minimizes the chance of injury. A useful tip in difficulty in getting a percutaneous renal access is administration of diuretic, if medically not contraindicated. This helps in distension of the calyces and helps in gaining access. One should also remember that if the tip of the needle is not seen along its trajectory, one should be beware of an intervening bowel.

I agree with the authors that a skilled hand is required for success of the procedure. The “hand” may be of a skilled interventional radiologist or an urologist. It is worth noting that there are clinical situations where an urologist is a better person to achieve the access. For instance, a patient with obstructive uropathy with renal and ureteric calculi, it will be the urologist who will be doing the percutaneous nephrolithotomy and clearing the stone bulk, and hence, the urologist rather than a radiologist would have a better insight into selecting the appropriate calyx to create a percutaneous tract to clear the stone with minimum morbidity.

Last but not the least, I agree with the authors that ultrasound-guided PCN placement is an indispensible emergency procedure, and open nephrostomy is almost relegated to history.

References

  1. , , , , , , . Percutaneous nephrostomy by direct puncture technique: An observational study. Indian J Nephrol. 2010;20:84-8.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. , , , . Supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy: Effective approach to high risk and morbidly obese patients. J Endourol. 2001;21:44-9.
    [Google Scholar]

    Fulltext Views
    55

    PDF downloads
    19
    View/Download PDF
    Download Citations
    BibTeX
    RIS
    Show Sections