1714 |

Misplaced Nephrostomy Catheter in Left 
Renal Vein: A Case Report of an Uncommon 
Complication Following Percutaneous Neph-
rolithotomy
Hüseyin Tarhan, İlker Akarken, Ozgür Cakmak, Ertan Can, Yusuf Ozlem Ilbey, Ferruh Zorlu

Corresponding Author;

Hüseyin Tarhan, MD
126/7 Sok. No.5/3 Evka-3 Bornova, 
İzmir, Turkey.

Tel: +90 23 2469 6969
Fax: +90 23 2433 0756
E-mail: httarhan@yahoo.com 

Received October 2013
Accepted April 2014

Department of Urology, Tepecik 

Education and Research Hospi-

tal, İzmir, Turkey.

CASE REPORT

Keywords: urologic surgical procedures; methods; nephrostomy; percutaneous; instrumenta-
tion; renal vein; injuries.

INTRODUCTION

In 1941 Rupel and Brown used a rigid cystoscope to extract the residual stones through a drain tract following open surgery.(1) That was the beginning idea of endoscopic renal surgery. L shaped endoscopes were used for visualizing calyceal stones during open 
procedures. The percutaneous nephrostomy was described by Goodwin in 1955 as a tem-
porary solution for obstruction secondary hydronephrotic patients.(2) Finally, Fernstrom and 
Johansson performed percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) successfully in three patients in 
1976.(3) Although PCNL is a safe and effective procedure which improves by experience and 
technology, complications may occur as the procedure in essence is controlled renal trauma. 
Here, we report an uncommon PCNL complication and our management.

CASE REPORT 
A 48 years old male who had previously undergone a left open nephrolithotomy 5 years prior 
underwent a left PCNL. Pre-operative hemoglobin level was 15.2 g/dL. The stones were in the 
renal pelvis and inferior pole of the kidney. An 18 gauge, 2 piece entry needle was advanced 

Case Report



1715Vol. 11    |    No. 03    |     May - June 2014    |U R O LO G Y   J O U R N A L

Misplaced Nephrostomy Catheter in Left Renal Vein   |  Tarhan et al

in a straight pathway into the mid pole calyx, another access 
to posterior inferior calyx was achieved and guidewires 
were placed. Dilatation of the tract was achieved by using 
8 French (F) co-axial and 30F Amplatz dilator set over the 
guidewire. Bleeding was moderate but renal pelvis was not 
accessible due to infundibular obstruction of the mid pole 
calyx, possibly because of the previous nephrolithotomy 
operation. During the procedure, stones were not visible 
and the bleeding became severe which led to interruption 
of the procedure, and a nephrostomy tube was inserted to 
control bleeding. In order to check intraoperatively if ne-
phrostomy tube was in the right place or not, an antegrade 
nephrostography was performed and it showed the filling 
in both inferior calyx and renal pelvis with no contrast ex-
travasation. In addition to that, any additional extravasation 
suggesting an additional venous or arterial injury was not 
detected (Figure 1). As a routine application, the nephros-
tomy tube was opened three hours after the procedure and 
there was no bleeding and post-operative hemoglobin level 
was 12.8 g/dL. On the seventh hour postoperatively, severe 
bleeding from the nephrostomy tube was noted, the blood 
pressure was decreased to unmeasurable levels and hemo-
globin level was 6.4 g/dL. After 3 units of blood transfusion 

and appropriate fluid replacement, vital signs of the patient 
were stabilized and hemoglobin level was increased to 9.1 
gr/dL. First postoperative day a contrast enhanced com-
puter tomography (CT) scan was performed and displayed 
that the nephrostomy catheter was inside the left renal vein 
(Figure 2). After the patient became hemodynamically sta-
ble, the nephrostomy catheter was removed by open surgery 
under general anesthesia by the vascular surgeon in the op-
eration team. No hemorrhage occurred after nephrostomy 
tube was removed, and hemodynamics was stable during 
the operation. Eventually, a silicone drain was placed into 
the retroperitoneal space. The drain was removed two days 
after the operation and the patient was discharged four on 
the fourth day postoperatively, and neither hemodynamic 
instability nor hematocrit level decrease was observed. The 
stones that have remained in the patient were removed by 
the 2nd PCNL operation one month later without any com-
plication observed, hence the patient became stone-free.

DISCUSSION
Today, PCNL is the frequently preferred option for the 
treatment of inferior calyx stones and large multiple stones.
(4) Renal hemorrhage is the most common complication of 
percutaneous renal surgery but hemorrhage which needs 
intervention is a rare complication.(5) In the literature, vari-
ous rates from 0.6% to 23.8% have been reported regarding 
transfusion rates.(6) Sepsis, intestinal injury, pleural injury, 
adjacent organ injury and extravasation are other complica-
tions of percutaneous renal surgery.(7)

Nephrostomy tube placement is a routine procedure fol-
lowing percutaneous renal surgery. Major renal vascular 

Figure 1. Antegrade nephrostography demonstrates the filling in 
both inferior calyx and renal pelvis with no contrast extravasation.

Figure 2. Contrast enhanced computer tomography scan shows 
that the nephrostomy catheter is inside the left renal vein.



1716 |

complications which are recognized during the operation 
can be resolved by the placement by placing a nephrosto-
my tube under the guidance of a fluoroscopy, without open 
surgery.(8) Although tube placement is an effective method 
to control venous bleeding, smaller size nephrostomy tube 
placement or tubeless procedures are being used for better 
patient comfort.(9,10)

 Our study is the third report in the literature regarding 
misplacement of nephrostomy tube into the vascular sys-
tem and the second report of a complication following 
PCNL.(1-11) In our case, an antegrade nephrostography was 
performed after placement of the nephrostomy tube but 
showed no extravasation to renal vein. On the seventh hours 
postoperatively, severe bleeding through the nephrostomy 
tube has occurred following inappropriate mobilization of 
the patient, and the tube was re-clamped in order to control 
the bleeding and the patient was immobilized. A contrast 
enhanced computer tomography was performed on the first 
day postoperatively and the misplacement of the nephros-
tomy tube was detected, which should be the result of an 
unrecognized preoperative injury caused by an inadvertent 
Amplatz dilatation or an inappropriate mobilization of the 
patient. We performed open surgery unlike other cases in 
the literature because of the patient’s choice and the legal 
restrictions about malpractice. The patient was discharged 
on the fourth day postoperatively without any complication. 
In our PCNL practices, we routinely verify the placement 
of the nephrostomy tube intraoperatively by antegrade ne-
phrostography without fail after placing nephrostomy tube 
and check whether there is any extravasation or not. We 
think that this is a compulsory procedure. The migration of 
the nephrostomy tube should have occurred if severe bleed-
ing is observed postoperatively, and an attentive control 
with computer tomography imaging following appropriate 
management of hemorrhage is essential.
CONCLUSION
It is strongly recommended that in case of misplacement 
of the tube the manipulation of the nephrostomy catheter 
should be handled under fluoroscopy guidance while the 
surgical team is ready to intervene.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None declared.

Case Report

REFERENCES

1. Mazzucchi E, Mitre A, Brito A, Arap M, Murta C, Srougi M. Intrave-
nous misplacement of the nephrostomy catheter following percu-
taneous nephrostolithotomy: two case reports. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 
2009;64:69-70.

2. Goodwin W, Casey W, Woolf W. Percutaneous trocar (needle) ne-
phrostomy in hydronephrosis. JAMA. 1955;157:891-4.

3. Fernstrom I, Johansson B. Percutaneous pyelolithotomy: A new ex-
traction technique. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1976;10:257-9.

4. Etemadian M, Shadpour P, Haghighi R, Mokhtari MR, Maghsoudi R. 
A rare, but life- threatening complication of percutaneous nephro-
lithotomy. Massive ıntraabdominal extravasation of irrigation fluid. 
Urol J. 2012;9:614-6.

5. Srivastava A, Singh KJ, Suri A, et al. Vascular complications after per-
cutaneous nephrolithotomy: are there any predictive factors? Urol-
ogy. 2005;66:38-40.

6. Mousavi-Bahar SH, Mehrabi S, Moslemi MK. Percutaneous Neph-
rolithotomy complications in 671 consecutive patients. A single-
center experience. Urol J. 2011;8:271-6.

7. Maurice Stephan Michel, Lutz Trojan, Jens Jochen Rassweiler. 
Complications in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy. Euro Urol. 
2007;51:899-906.

8. Mantu Gupta, Gary C, Bellman And Arthur D. Smıth Massıve Hemor-
rhage From Renal Veın Injury During Percutaneous Renal Surgery: 
Endourological Management J Urol. 1997;157:795-7.

9. Maheshwari PN, Andankar MG, Bansal M. Nephrostomy tube after 
percutaneous nephrolithotomy: large-bore or pigtail catheter? J 
Endourol. 2000;14:735-7.

10. Lojanapiwat B, Soonthornphan S, Wudhikarn S. Tubeless per-

cutaneous nephrolithotomy in selected patients. J Endourol. 

2001;15:711-3.

11. Dias-Filho AC, Coaracy GA, Borges W. Right atrial migration of ne-

phrostomy catheter.

Int Braz J Urol. 2005;31:470-1.