Intervention Review

You have free access to this content

Routine intraoperative ureteric stenting for kidney transplant recipients

  1. Colin H Wilson1,*,
  2. David A Rix2,
  3. Derek M Manas3

Editorial Group: Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Group

Published Online: 17 JUN 2013

Assessed as up-to-date: 27 MAR 2013

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004925.pub3


How to Cite

Wilson CH, Rix DA, Manas DM. Routine intraoperative ureteric stenting for kidney transplant recipients. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 6. Art. No.: CD004925. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004925.pub3.

Author Information

  1. 1

    The Freeman Hospital, Transplant Surgery, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Tyne and Wear, UK

  2. 2

    The Freeman Hospital, Urology and Transplantation, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK

  3. 3

    The Freeman Hospital, The Liver/Renal Unit, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

*Colin H Wilson, Transplant Surgery, The Freeman Hospital, Freeman Road, High Heaton, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Tyne and Wear, NE7 7DN, UK. colinwilson2206@gmail.com.

Publication History

  1. Publication Status: New search for studies and content updated (no change to conclusions)
  2. Published Online: 17 JUN 2013

SEARCH

References

References to studies included in this review

  1. References to studies included in this review
  2. References to studies excluded from this review
  3. Additional references
  4. References to other published versions of this review
Bassiri 1995 {published data only}
Benoit 1996 {published data only}
  • Benoit G, Blanchet P, Eschewege P, Alexandre L, Bensadouin H, Charpentier B. Insertion of double pigtail ureteral stent for the prevention of urological complications in renal transplantation: a prospective randomized study. Journal of Urology 1996;156(3 Pt 1):881-4. [MEDLINE: 9258109]
  • Eschwege P, Blanchet P, Bellamy J, Charpentier B, Jardin A, Benoit G. Does the use of double J ureteral stents reduce stenosis and fistulas in renal transplantation. Transplantation Proceedings 1995;27(4):2436. [MEDLINE: 7652868]
Dominguez 2000 {published and unpublished data}
Guleria 1998 {published data only}
  • Guleria S, Agarwal S, Kumar R, Khazanchi RK, Agarwal SK, Tiwari SC. The double J stent: its impact on the urological complications in live - related transplantation. Indian Journal of Urology 1998;14(2):101-4. [EMBASE: 1998168985]
Kumar 1998 {published data only}
  • Kumar A, Kumar R, Bhandari M. Significance of routine JJ stenting in living related renal transplantation: a prospective randomised study. Transplantation Proceedings 1998;30(7):2995-7. [MEDLINE: 9838320]
  • 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. Journal of Urology 2000;164(3 (Pt 1)):657-60. [MEDLINE: 10953120]
Osman 2004 {published and unpublished data}
  • Osman Y, Ali-El-Dein B, Shokeir AA, Kamal M, Shehab El-Din AB. Routine insertion of ureteric stent in live-donor renal transplantation; is it worthwhile? [abstract]. Transplantation 2004;78(2 Suppl):87. [CENTRAL: CN-00509398]
  • Osman Y, Ali-el-Dein B, Shokeir AA, Kamal M, Shehab El-Dein AB. Routine insertion of ureteral stent in live-donor renal transplantation: Is it worthwhile?. Urology 2005;65(5):867-71. [MEDLINE: 15882713]
Pleass 1995 {published and unpublished data}
  • Pleass HC, Clark KR, Rigg KM, Reddy KS, Forsythe JLR, Proud G, et al. Urologic complications after renal transplantation: a prospective randomized trial comparing different techniques of ureteric anastomosis and the use of prophylactic ureteric stents. Transplantation Proceedings 1995;27(1):1091-2. [MEDLINE: 7878817]

References to studies excluded from this review

  1. References to studies included in this review
  2. References to studies excluded from this review
  3. Additional references
  4. References to other published versions of this review
Anil 2012 {published data only}
  • Anil M, Appu T, George K, Georgy M, Ginil K, Indu KN, et al. Is early removal of prophylactic ureteric stents beneficial in live donor renal transplantation. Indian Journal of Nephrology 2012;22(4):275-9. [EMBASE: 2012596287]
Asadpour 2011 {published data only}
  • Asadpour A, Molaei M, Yaghoobi S. Management of ureteral complications in renal transplantation: prevention and treatment. Saudi Journal of Kidney Diseases & Transplantation 2011;22(1):72-4. [MEDLINE: 21196616]
Battaglia 2005 {published data only}
  • Battaglia M, Ditonno P, Selvaggio O, Palazzo S, Bettocchi C, Peschechera R, et al. Double J stent with antireflux device in the prevention of short-term urological complications after cadaveric kidney transplantation: single-center prospective randomized study. Transplantation Proceedings 2005;37(6):2525-6. [MEDLINE: 16182733]
Dadkhah 2010 {published data only}
  • Dadkhah F, Asgari MA, Tara A, Safarinejad MR. Modified ureteroneocystostomy in kidney transplantation to facilitate endoscopic management of subsequent urological complications. International Urology & Nephrology 2010;42(2):285-93. [MEDLINE: 19760513]
Gunawansa 2011 {published data only}
  • Gunawansa N, Cassim R, Abeydeera A, Wijeyaratne M. Early bedside removal versus late cystoscopic removal of ureteric stents following renal transplantation; Does it make a difference? [abstract]. American Journal of Transplantation 2011;11(Suppl 1):73. [EMBASE: 70329005]
  • Gunawansa N, Cassim R, Abeydheera A, Wijeyaratne.M. Early bedside removal versus late cystoscopic removal of ureteric stents following renal transplantation; does it make a difference? [abstract]. Transplant International 2011;24(Suppl 2):288. [EMBASE: 70528137]
Huang 2012 {published data only}
  • Huang L, Wang X, Ma Y, Wang J, Tao X, Liao L, et al. A comparative study of 3-week and 6-week duration of double-j stent placement in renal transplant recipients. Urologia Internationalis 2012;89(1):89-92. [EMBASE: 2012461737]
Moray 2005 {published data only}
Parapiboon 2012 {published data only}
  • Parapiboon W, Ingsathit A, Disthabanchong S, Nongnuch A, Jearanaipreprem A, Charoenthanakit C, et al. Impact of early ureteric stent removal and cost-benefit analysis in kidney transplant recipients: results of a randomized controlled study. Transplantation Proceedings 2012;44(3):737-9. [MEDLINE: 22483481]
  • Parapiboon W, Ingsathit A, Jirasiritham S, Sumethkul V. High incidence of bacteriuria in early post-kidney transplantation; results from a randomized controlled study. Transplantation Proceedings 2012;44(3):734-6. [MEDLINE: 22483480]
  • Parapiboon W, Ingsathit A, Junchotikul P, Wiengpon K, Viseshsindh W, Leenanupunth C, et al. Early ureteric stent removal reduces urinary tract infection in kidney transplant recipients, a randomized controlled trial (Eureka) [abstract]. Transplant International 2011;24(Suppl 2):43. [EMBASE: 70527232]
Simpson 2006 {published data only}
Tavakoli 2007 {published and unpublished data}
  • Tavakoli A, Augustine T, Surange R, Pararajasingam R, Marco M, Al-Maket S, et al. The routine use of the double J stents in renal transplantation - does it make a difference? [abstract]. XIXth International Congress of the Transplantation Society; 2002 Aug 25-30; Miami, FL. 2002.
  • 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. Journal of Urology 2007;177(6):2260-4. [MEDLINE: 17509336]
TrUST Study 2011 {published data only}
  • Patel P, Sinha M, Mamode N, Koffman G, Olsburgh J. Transplant ureteric stent trial (trust): Early versus standard removal. a randomised controlled trial-pilot data [abstract]. Transplant International 2011;24(Suppl 2):205. [EMBASE: 70527807]
  • Patel PP, Sinha M, Koffman G, Olsburgh J. TrUST (transplant ureteric stent trial): Early versus standard removal. A randomised controlled trial - The pilot data [abstract]. BJU International 2011;108(Suppl 1):58. [EMBASE: 70480185]
Valentini 2004 {published data only}
  • Valentini AL, De Gaetano AM, Minordi LM, Nanni G, Citterio F, Viggiano AM, et al. Contrast-enhanced voiding US for grading of reflux in adult patients prior to antireflux ureteral implantation. Radiology 2004;233(1):35-9. [MEDLINE: 15317946]
Zargar 2005 {published data only}
  • Zargar MA, Shahrokh H, Mohammadi Fallah MR, Zargar H. Comparing Taguchi and anterior Lich-Gregoir ureterovesical reimplantation techniques for kidney transplantation. Transplantation Proceedings 2005;37(7):3077-8. [MEDLINE: 16213310]

Additional references

  1. References to studies included in this review
  2. References to studies excluded from this review
  3. Additional references
  4. References to other published versions of this review
Baum 1982
EBPG 2002
  • EBPG Expert Group on Renal Transplantation. European best practice guidelines for renal transplantation. Section IV: Long-term management of the transplant recipient. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2002;17 Suppl 4:50-2. [MEDLINE: 12484407]
Finney 1978
French 2001
Higgins 2003
Insall 1995
Ioannidis 2004
  • Ioannidis JPA, Evans SJW, Gotzsche PC, O'Neill RT, Altman DG, Schulz K, et al. Better reporting of harms in randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. Annals of Internal Medicine 2004;141(10):781-8. [MEDLINE: 15545678]
Joshi 2003
Karam 2004
Konnak 1972
Kumar 2004
  • 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 centre during the last ten years: impact of the double J stent. Journal of Urology 2000;164(3 Pt 1):657-60. [MEDLINE: 10953120]
Lin 1993
Mangus 2004
Merrill 1956
Politano 1958
Rigg 1994
  • Rigg KM, Proud G, Taylor RM. Urological complications following renal transplantation. A study of 1016 consecutive transplants from a single centre. Transplant International 1994;7(2):120-6. [MEDLINE: 8179799]
Schulz 1995
Thomalla 1990
Turner 1982

References to other published versions of this review

  1. References to studies included in this review
  2. References to studies excluded from this review
  3. Additional references
  4. References to other published versions of this review
Wilson 2005