• 1 Kyles AE, Hardie EM, Wooden BG, et al. Clinical, clinicopathologic, radiographic, and ultrasonographic abnormalities in cats with ureteral calculi: 163 cases (1984-2002). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005; 226:932936.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2 Kyles AE, Hardie EM, Wooden BG, et al. Management and outcome of cats with ureteral calculi: 153 cases (1984-2002). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005; 226:937944.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3 Berent A, Weisse C, Bagley D, et al. Ureteral stenting for benign and malignant disease in dogs and cats. Vet Surg 2007; 36:E1E29.

  • 4 Berent AC, Weisse C, Beal MW, et al. Use of indwelling, double-pigtail stents for treatment of malignant ureteral obstruction in dogs: 12 cases (2006-2009). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2011; 238:10171025.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5 Zaid M, Berent A, Weisse C, et al. Feline ureteral strictures: 10 cases. J Vet Intern Med 2011; 25:222229.

  • 6 Steffey M, Rassnick KM, Porter B, et al. Ureteral mast cell tumor in a dog. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2004; 40:8285.

  • 7 Snyder DM, Steffery MA, Mehler SJ, et al. Diagnosis and surgical management of ureteral calculi in dogs: 16 cases (1990-2003). N Z Vet J 2004; 53:1925.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8 Hardie EM, Kyles AE. Management of ureteral obstruction. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2004; 34:9891010.

  • 9 McLouglin MA, Bjorling DE. Ureters. In: Slatter D, ed. Textbook of small animal surgery. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co, 2003;16191628.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10 Wen JG, Frokiaer J, Jorgensen TM, et al. Obstructive nephropathy: an update of the experimental research. Urol Res 1999; 27:2939.

  • 11 Fink RW, Caradis DT, Chmiel R, et al. Renal impairment and its reversibility following variable periods of complete ureteric obstruction. Aust N Z J Surg 1980; 50:7783.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12 Kerr WS. Effect of complete ureteral obstruction for one week on kidney function. J Appi Physiol 1954; 6:762772.

  • 13 Vaughan ED Jr, Sweet RE, Gillenwater JY. Unilateral ureteral occlusion: pattern of nephron repair and compensatory response. J Urol 1973; 109:979982.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14 Langston CE, Cowgill LD, Spano JA. Applications and outcome of hemodialysis in cats: a review of 29 cases. J Vet Intern Med 1997; 11:348355.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15 Coroneos E, Assouad M, Krishnan B, et al. Urinary obstruction causes irreversible renal failure by inducing chronic tubulointerstitial nephritis. Clin Nephrol 1997; 48:125128.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16 Wilson DR. Renal function during and following obstruction. Ann Rev Med 1977; 28:329339.

  • 17 Block G, Adams LG, Widmer WR, et al. Use of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of nephrolithiasis and ureterolithiasis in five dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1996; 208:531536.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18 Adams LG, Senior DF. Electrohydraulic and extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1999; 29:293302.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19 Weisse CW, Berent AC, Todd KL, et al. Clinical applications of interventional radiology in veterinary medicine. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2008; 233:15641574.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20 Rawlings C, Bjorling D & Christie B. Ureteral surgery. In: Slatter D, ed. Texbook of small animal surgery. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Saunders, 2003;16141615.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21 Nwadike BS, Wilson LP, Stone EA. Use of bilateral temporary nephrostomy catheters for emergency treatment of bilateral ureter transection in a cat. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000; 217:18621865.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22 Chambers JN, Selcer BA, Barsanti JA. Recovery from severe hydroureter and hydronephrosis after ureteral anastomosis in a dog. J Am Vet MedA ssoc 1987; 191:15891592.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23 Ehnen SJ, Divers TH, Gillette D, et al. Obstructive nephrolithiasis and ureterolithiasis associated with chronic renal failure in horses: eight cases (1981-1987). J Am Vet Med Assoc 1990; 197:249253.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24 Goodwin WE, Casey WC & Woolf W. Percutaneous trocar (needle) nephrostomy in hydronephrosis. JAMA 1955;157:891894.

  • 25 Park BK, Kim SH, Moon MH. Nonvascular interventions of the urinary tract. J Korean Med Sci 2002; 17:727736.

  • 26 Dyer RB, Regan JD, Kavanagh PV, et al. Percutaneous nephrostomy with extension of the techniques: step by step. Radiographics 2002; 22:503525.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27 Wah TM, Weston MJ, Irving HC. Percutaneous nephrostomy insertion. Clin Radiol 2004; 59:255261.

  • 28 Ogeer-Gyles J, Mathews K, Weese JS, et al. Evaluation of catheter-associated urinary tract infections and multi-drug-resistant Escherichia coli isolates from the urine of dogs with indwelling urinary catheters. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2006; 229:15841590.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29 Sullivan LA, Campbell VL, Onuma SC. Evaluation of open versus closed urine collection systems and development of nosocomial bacteriuria in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2010; 237:187190.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30 Smarick SD, Haskins SC, Aldrich J, et al. Incidence of catheter-associated urinary tract infection among dogs in a small animal intensive care unit. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2004; 224:19361940.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31 Lennon GM. Double pigtail ureteric stent versus percutaneous nephrostomy: effects on stone transit and ureteric motility. Eur Urol 1997; 31:2429.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement

Use of locking-loop pigtail nephrostomy catheters in dogs and cats: 20 cases (2004–2009)

Allyson C. BerentDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging and Interventional Radiology, The Animal Medical Center, 510 E 62nd St, New York, NY 10065.

Search for other papers by Allyson C. Berent in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, DACVIM
,
Chick W. WeisseDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging and Interventional Radiology, The Animal Medical Center, 510 E 62nd St, New York, NY 10065.

Search for other papers by Chick W. Weisse in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 VMD, DACVS
,
Kimberly L. ToddMatthew J. Ryan Veterinary Hospital, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104.

Search for other papers by Kimberly L. Todd in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Demetrius H. BagleyDepartment of Urology, Jefferson Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA 19107.

Search for other papers by Demetrius H. Bagley in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MD

Abstract

Objective—To describe the procedure and clinical usefulness of locking-loop pigtail nephrostomy catheter (PNC) placement in dogs and cats.

Design—Retrospective case series.

Animals—16 cats (18 kidneys) and 4 dogs (4 kidneys) that underwent PNC placement.

Procedures—Medical records of patients that underwent PNC placement were reviewed. The PNCs were placed percutaneously with ultrasonographic and fluoroscopic guidance or via a ventral midline laparotomy with fluoroscopic guidance. Either a modified Seldinger technique or a 1-stab trocar introduction technique was used for PNC placement. Preoperative renal pelvic size, postoperative renal pelvic decompression, catheter patency, serum biochemical changes, and results of microbial culture of urine samples were reviewed. Length of time the catheter was in place, reason and method for catheter removal, complications, and clinical outcomes were noted.

Results—Reasons for PNC placement were ureterolithiasis (15 kidneys), ureteral stricture (3), malignant obstruction (2), and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (2). Seven of 22 catheters were placed percutaneously, and 15 were placed via a ventral midline laparotomy. Catheters were either size 5F (n = 17) or 6F (5). The PNCs remained indwelling for a median of 7 days (range, 1 to 28 days). Catheter-associated complications included urine leakage (n = 1) and accidental dislodgement by the patient at home (1). All catheters performed successfully by providing temporary urine diversion and drainage for successful renal pelvis decompression.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Placement of locking-loop PNCs was safe, effective, and well tolerated in dogs and cats for temporary urine diversion to achieve renal pelvis decompression.

Abstract

Objective—To describe the procedure and clinical usefulness of locking-loop pigtail nephrostomy catheter (PNC) placement in dogs and cats.

Design—Retrospective case series.

Animals—16 cats (18 kidneys) and 4 dogs (4 kidneys) that underwent PNC placement.

Procedures—Medical records of patients that underwent PNC placement were reviewed. The PNCs were placed percutaneously with ultrasonographic and fluoroscopic guidance or via a ventral midline laparotomy with fluoroscopic guidance. Either a modified Seldinger technique or a 1-stab trocar introduction technique was used for PNC placement. Preoperative renal pelvic size, postoperative renal pelvic decompression, catheter patency, serum biochemical changes, and results of microbial culture of urine samples were reviewed. Length of time the catheter was in place, reason and method for catheter removal, complications, and clinical outcomes were noted.

Results—Reasons for PNC placement were ureterolithiasis (15 kidneys), ureteral stricture (3), malignant obstruction (2), and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (2). Seven of 22 catheters were placed percutaneously, and 15 were placed via a ventral midline laparotomy. Catheters were either size 5F (n = 17) or 6F (5). The PNCs remained indwelling for a median of 7 days (range, 1 to 28 days). Catheter-associated complications included urine leakage (n = 1) and accidental dislodgement by the patient at home (1). All catheters performed successfully by providing temporary urine diversion and drainage for successful renal pelvis decompression.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Placement of locking-loop PNCs was safe, effective, and well tolerated in dogs and cats for temporary urine diversion to achieve renal pelvis decompression.

Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to Dr. Berent (Allyson.Berent@amcny.org).