Comparison of anti-reflux mechanism between Double-J-Stent and standart Double-J-Stent use for risk of BK nephropathy and urinary tract Infection in kidney transplantation

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorAy, Nurettin
dc.contributor.authorBahadir, Mehmet Veysi
dc.contributor.authorAnil, Melih
dc.contributor.authorAlp, Vahhac
dc.contributor.authorKaya, Safak
dc.contributor.authorSevuk, Utkan
dc.contributor.authorGul, Mesut
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-24T17:33:22Z
dc.date.available2024-04-24T17:33:22Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.departmentDicle Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractObjectives: There are studies that show that double J stenting (DJS) increase BK nephropathy (BKN) 4 fold. DJS may cause vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) with normal bladder contraction. The aim of this study is to comparison risk of BKN, urinary tract infections (UTI) and postoperative urologic complications with the use DJS with anti-reflux device (ARD-DJS) and standart double J stent (St-DJS). Matherial and methods: Ninety patients (male/female: 50/40) that had undergone kidney transplantations in Diyarbakir Training and Research Hospital and Dicle University, Faculty of Medicine Hospital between January 2012 and April 2015 were enrolled in the study. Demographic data, immunosuppression protocols, presence of rejection, graft loss, postoperative urologic complications, UTI, plasma BK levels of the patients were evaluated retrospectively. Results: Median and IQR follow up time for ARD-DJS and St-DJS patients were 14 (12-18) months and 25 (16-30) months respectively. Five cases (5.5%) had BK viremia (P=0.025). All 5 cases with BK viremia were St-DJS users. Conclusion: As a result for postoperative UTI and postoperative urinary complication risk there were no statistically significant difference between ARD-DJS use and St-DJS use during ureteral anastomosis. BKN univariate analysis were significantly less than those st-DJS used. Risc factors were evaluated. But results were not statistically significant in the logistic regression analysis. We think that to demonstrate this benefit, we need randomized controlled studies with more patients and longer follow up.en_US
dc.identifier.endpage16345en_US
dc.identifier.issn1940-5901
dc.identifier.issue9en_US
dc.identifier.pmid26629154
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84946599746
dc.identifier.scopusqualityN/A
dc.identifier.startpage16340en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11468/20645
dc.identifier.volume8en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000365273300093
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherE-Century Publishing Corpen_US
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectDouble J Stentingen_US
dc.subjectAnti-Reflux Deviceen_US
dc.subjectBk Nephropathyen_US
dc.titleComparison of anti-reflux mechanism between Double-J-Stent and standart Double-J-Stent use for risk of BK nephropathy and urinary tract Infection in kidney transplantationen_US
dc.titleComparison of anti-reflux mechanism between Double-J-Stent and standart Double-J-Stent use for risk of BK nephropathy and urinary tract Infection in kidney transplantation
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu