Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Mar 31;35(1):41-47.
doi: 10.4285/kjt.20.0050. Epub 2021 Mar 12.

The impact of prophylactic ureteral stenting during kidney transplantation on postoperative surgical outcomes

JongBeom Park  1 , Soo Yeun Lee  1 , Hyung Soon Lee  1 , Sug Kyun Shin  2 , Tae Hwan Kim  3
Affiliations

The impact of prophylactic ureteral stenting during kidney transplantation on postoperative surgical outcomes

JongBeom Park et al. Korean J Transplant. .

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of prophylactic ureteric stenting during kidney transplantation (KT).

Methods: The authors retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent KT between June 2016 and June 2019. The prophylactic ureteral stenting group (double-J [DJ]) and no-stent group (no-DJ) were compared with respect to the clinical data and surgical outcomes.

Results: A total of 42 patients underwent KT; 17 patients were classified into the DJ group and 25 patients into the no-DJ group. Antithymocyte globulin induction and donor-specific antibody positivity were significantly higher in the DJ group. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of symptomatic urinary tract infection (UTI). The time to postoperative UTI was significantly shorter in the DJ group than in the no-DJ group (33.5±7.8 vs. 105.3±71.6 days, P=0.013). The development of postoperative BK viremia was significantly higher in the no-DJ group (0.0% vs. 16.0%, P=0.035). Urologic complications were significantly higher in the no-DJ group (0.0% vs. 16.0%, P=0.035). In the no-DJ group, urologic complications occurred in four patients ureteroneocystostomy stenosis in three patients and ureteroneocystostomy leakage in one patient. Percutaneous ureteral interventions were performed for all patients using percutaneous nephrostomy and reno-uretero-vesical stenting. However, there were no postoperative urologic complications in the DJ group.

Conclusions: Prophylactic ureteric stenting during KT may be safe and feasible without significantly increasing the incidence of UTI and BK viremia. Additionally, prophylactic ureteric stenting may reduce urologic complications after KT.

Keywords: Kidney transplantation; Postoperative complication; Stents; Ureter; Urinary tract infection.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Kumar A, Verma BS, Srivastava A, Bhandari M, Gupta A, Sharma R. Evaluation of the urological complications of living related renal transplantation at a single center during the last 10 years: impact of the Double-J stent. J Urol. 2000;164(3 Pt 1):657–60. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67275-8. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Butterworth PC, Horsburgh T, Veitch PS, Bell PR, Nicholson ML. Urological complications in renal transplantation: impact of a change of technique. Br J Urol. 1997;79:499–502. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410X.1997.00117.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mangus RS, Haag BW. Stented versus nonstented extravesical ureteroneocystostomy in renal transplantation: a metaanalysis. Am J Transplant. 2004;4:1889–96. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2004.00595.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Tavakoli A, Surange RS, Pearson RC, Parrott NR, Augustine T, Riad HN. Impact of stents on urological complications and health care expenditure in renal transplant recipients: results of a prospective, randomized clinical trial. J Urol. 2007;177:2260–4. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.01.152. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Abrol N, Dean PG, Prieto M, Stegall MD, Taner T. Routine stenting of extravesical ureteroneocystostomy in kidney transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Transplant Proc. 2018;50:3397–404. doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2018.06.041. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources