double-j versus external ureteral stents in kidney transplantation: a retrospective analysis

conclusions this nonrandomized comparison of stent types in kidney transplantation supports the use of prophylactic double-j stents in terms of decreased ureteric complications and reduced length of hospital stay. patients and methods a retrospective analysis was performed on data of renal transplantations performed at our institution in a 12-month period. in this period, external and double-j stents were used in parallel. length of hospital stay and stent-associated complications were evaluated. results in 76 kidney transplants, 43 external (group 1) and 33 double-j (group 2) urinary stents were used. no significant difference was observed in the number of urinary tract infections, ureteric stenosis or necrosis. the mean overall length of hospital stay was comparable in both groups (20.7 days in group 1 vs 19.3 days in group 2, p = 0.533). for patients without immunological complications, the hospital stay was significantly reduced using double-j stents (12.9 days in group 1, 10.8 days in group 2, p = 0.018). leakage of the ureteroneocystostomy occurred in 6 out of 43 patients in group 1 (13.9%). no case of anastomotic insufficiency was observed in group 2 (p = 0.035). macrohematuria was detected in 13 out of the 43 patients in group 1 (30.2%), compared to 3 out of 33 patients in group 2 (9.1%; p = 0.045). objectives this study aimed to compare outcomes of double-j versus percutaneous ureteral stent placement in renal transplantation. background kidney transplantation has long been recognized as the best available therapy for end stage kidney disease.