Abstract
The medical records of 116 patients who had 168 ureteric double J (pigtail) catheters inserted over a 6-year period between 1981 and 1987 were reviewed. Eighty-five patients had pigtails inserted for benign conditions and 31 for malignant disease. The pigtail catheters were inserted cystoscopically in 88 patients, percutaneously in 7 patients and by open surgery in 21 patients. Of 168 pigtail catheters used, 147 were soft (silicone, multilength) and 21 hard (polyurethane). No mortality was attributable to the use of these catheters but certain complications were commonly encountered. Loin discomfort occurred after 32 (19%) insertions; 27 of 147 (18%) soft catheters and 5 of 21 (24%) hard catheters. Trigonal irritation, confirmed cystoscopically was reported in 26 of 147 (18%) insertions of soft catheters and in 6 of the 21 (29%) with hard catheters (chi 2, P = 0.37). Urinary tract infection (confirmed by urine microscopy and culture) occurred after 46 (31%) soft catheter insertions and after 13 of 21 (61%) hard catheter insertions (chi 2 test, P = 0.01). Stent migration occurred in five patients and obstruction in two. Pigtail catheters are safe ureteric stents which are easy to insert and their use is supported by this study. The complications of associated infection, trigonal irritation and loin discomfort are relatively common and still occur even with soft catheters. Careful monitoring of all patients with pigtail catheters in position is recommended.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Druy E. M. A dilating introducer-sheath for the antegrade insertion of ureteral stents. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1985 Dec;145(6):1274–1276. doi: 10.2214/ajr.145.6.1274. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Finney R. P. Experience with new double J ureteral catheter stent. J Urol. 1978 Dec;120(6):678–681. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)57326-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hepperlen T. W., Mardis H. K., Kammandel H. Self-retained internal ureteral stents: a new approach. J Urol. 1978 Jun;119(6):731–734. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)57613-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- LeRoy A. J., Williams H. J., Jr, Segura J. W., Patterson D. E., Benson R. C., Jr Indwelling ureteral stents: percutaneous management of complications. Radiology. 1986 Jan;158(1):219–222. doi: 10.1148/radiology.158.1.3510020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mardis H. K., Kroeger R. M., Hepperlen T. W., Mazer M. J., Kammandel H. Polyethylene double-pigtail ureteral stents. Urol Clin North Am. 1982 Feb;9(1):95–101. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Marmar J. L. The management of ureteral obstruction with silicone rubber splint catheters. J Urol. 1970 Sep;104(3):386–389. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)61744-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Orikasa S., Tsuji I., Siba T., Oashi N. A new technique for transurethral insertion of a silicone rubber tube into an obstructed ureter. J Urol. 1973 Aug;110(2):184–187. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)60154-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pocock R. D., Stower M. J., Ferro M. A., Smith P. J., Gingell J. C. Double J stents. A review of 100 patients. Br J Urol. 1986 Dec;58(6):629–633. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410x.1986.tb05900.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Reznek R. H., Talner L. B. Percutaneous nephrostomy. Radiol Clin North Am. 1984 Jun;22(2):393–406. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rozenblit G., Tarasov E., Srur M. F., Neithamer C. D., Jr, Sumers E. H., Sos T. A. Druy ureteral stent set: clinical experience in 25 patients. Radiology. 1986 Sep;160(3):737–740. doi: 10.1148/radiology.160.3.3737912. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Zimskind P. D., Fetter T. R., Wilkerson J. L. Clinical use of long-term indwelling silicone rubber ureteral splints inserted cystoscopically. J Urol. 1967 May;97(5):840–844. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)63130-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]