A comparative analysis of percutaneous ultrasonography-guided endoscopic lavage and open drainage for perinephric abscess
Jia Hongliang1, Zhang Peixin1, Yusufu·Ainiwaer1, Li Jiuzhi1, Zhou Ping1, Li Yun2
1 Department of Urology, People's Hospital of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, Urumqi 830001, China;
2 Department of Urology, the People's Hospital of Xinyu
Abstract：Objective: To compare the efficacy of percutaneous ultrasonography-guided endoscopic lavage and open drainage for perinephric abscess. Methods: The files of 90 patients who underwent drainage for perinephric abscesses from January 2011 to January 2016 in Department of Urology in People's Hospitalof Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region were evaluated. The method of drainage for each patient was performed according to the clinical decision of the treating physician. Percutaneous ultrasonography-guided endoscopic lavage was used for drainage of the abscess in 45 patients (endoscopic group), and remaining 45 patients were managed with open drainage (open drainage group). Cure was defined as complete obliteration of the abscess cavity. The cure rates, complications, and postoperative hospital stay were compared between two groups. Results: The study included 52 males and 38 females with mean age of (45.3±16.1) years old. The most common predisposing factors were stones and diabetes mellitus. There was no statistically significant difference in cure rate between two groups (95% vs. 97%, P>0.05). Percutaneous ultrasonography-guided endoscopic lavage of perinephric abscesses resulted in shorter postoperative hospital stay than open drainage (4.0 vs. 11.8 d, P<0.05). Complications were observed in 6.6% of endoscopic group and 11.1% of open drainage group (P>0.05). Conclusions: Percutaneous ultrasonography-guided endoscopic lavage is an effective and safe minimally invasive treatment for patients with perinephric abscesses.
[1] Meng MV, Mario LA, Mcaninch JW. Current treatment and outcomes of perinephric abscesses. J Urol, 2002,168(4 Pt 1):1337-1340.
[2] Lin HS, Ye JJ, Huang TY, et al. Characteristics and factors influencing treatment outcome of renal and perinephric abscess a 5-year experience at a tertiary teaching hospital in Taiwan. J Microbiol Immunol Infect, 2008,41(4):342-350.
[3] Ng CF, Liong YV, Leong WS, et al. A better way to manage perinephric abscesses: percutaneous ultrasonography-guided endoscopic lavage. J Endourol, 2014,28(5):528-531.
[4] Rubilotta E, Balzarro M, Lacola V, et al. Current clinical management of renal and perinephric abscesses: a literature review. Urologia, 2015,81(3):144-147.
[5] Liu XQ, Wang CC, Liu YB, et al. Renal and perinephric abscesses in West China Hospital: 10-year retrospective-descriptive study. World J Nephrol, 2016,5(1):108-114.
[6] Salvatierra O, Bucklew WB, Morrow JW. Perinephric abscess: a report of 71 cases. J Urol, 1967,98(3):296-302.
[7] Coelho RF, Schneider-Monteiro ED, Mesquita JL, et al. Renal and perinephric abscesses: analysis of 65 consecutive cases. World J Surg, 2007,31(2):431-436.
[8] Saiki J, Vaziri ND, Barton C. Perinephric and intranephric abscesses: A review of the literature. West J Med, 1982,136(2):95-102.
[9] Vansonnenberg E, Mueller PR, Ferrucci JT. Percutaneous drainage of 250 abdominal abscesses and fluid collections. Part I: Results, failures, and complications. Radiology, 1984,151(2):337-341.
[10] Negrete-Pulido O, Gutierrez-Aceves J. Management of infectious complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol,2009,23(10):1757-1762.
[11] Dodson ME. Lithotripsy for renal stone disease. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed), 1985,291(6508):1577.
