Tubeless vs standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis

被引:47
作者
Wang, Jiawu [1 ]
Zhao, Chunlei [1 ]
Zhang, Chengyao [1 ]
Fan, Xiaodong [1 ]
Lin, Yanjun [1 ]
Jiang, Qing [1 ]
机构
[1] Chongqing Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp 2, Dept Urol, Chongqing 400016, Peoples R China
关键词
tubeless; percutaneous nephrolithotomy; meta-analysis; EFFICACY; SAFETY; NEPHROSTOMY; SEALANT;
D O I
10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10463.x
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE To systematically review and compare tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) with standard PCNL. MATERIALS AND METHODS We conducted a review of the English language literature on studies involving randomized controlled trials for PCNL. The studies chosen to be included in our review compared tubeless PCNL with standard PCNL and described the advantages of each in the outcomes. Two reviewers independently screened the studies for eligibility, evaluated their quality and extracted the data from the eligible studies, with confi rmation by cross-checking Data were processed using REVMAN 5.0 RESULTS Seven studies involving 1365 cases met the inclusion criteria, and these were included in the meta- analysis. The patients' baseline characteristics were comparable in all the studies. By comparing the four common characteristics, we found no difference in effi cacy between the two surgical approaches in terms of mean operation duration and postoperative haematocrit change ( P > 0.05). We found that the mean analgesic requirement and number of days in hospital were lower for tubeless PCNL ( P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS Our results show that tubeless PCNL is a good option in non- complicated cases, with the advantages of reduced hospital stay and little need for postoperative analgesia. There was no difference between the two approaches in operation duration, or haematocrit change after surgery. As only few studies with small study populations were available, more high quality larger trials with longer follow- up are recommended.
引用
收藏
页码:918 / 924
页数:7
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]   A Randomized comparison of tubeless and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy [J].
Agrawal, Madhu S. ;
Agrawal, Mayank ;
Gupta, Apurva ;
Bansal, Sumit ;
Yadav, Abhishek ;
Goyal, Jitendra .
JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2008, 22 (03) :439-442
[2]  
[Anonymous], COCH C 7
[3]   Tubeless percutaneous renal surgery [J].
Bellman, GC ;
Davidoff, R ;
Candela, J ;
Gerspach, J ;
Kurtz, S ;
Stout, L .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1997, 157 (05) :1578-1582
[4]   Randomized trial comparing modified tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy with tailed stent with percutaneous nephrostomy with small-bore tube [J].
Choi, Michael ;
Brusky, John ;
Weaver, John ;
Amantia, Monica ;
Bellman, Gary C. .
JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2006, 20 (10) :766-770
[5]   Safety and efficacy of tubeless percutaneous nephrostolithotomy [J].
Delnay, KM ;
Wake, RW .
WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1998, 16 (06) :375-377
[6]   Antibiotic prophylaxis in percutaneous nephrolithotomy:: Prospective study in 81 patients [J].
Dogan, HS ;
Sahin, A ;
Cetinkaya, Y ;
Akdogan, B ;
Özden, E ;
Kendi, S .
JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2002, 16 (09) :649-653
[7]  
Gob M, 1999, J ENDOUROL, V13, P177
[8]   Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? [J].
Jadad, AR ;
Moore, RA ;
Carroll, D ;
Jenkinson, C ;
Reynolds, DJM ;
Gavaghan, DJ ;
McQuay, HJ .
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1996, 17 (01) :1-12
[9]  
Jou YC, 2004, J ENDOUROL, V18, P547
[10]   Supracostal Access: Does it affect Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Efficacy and Safety? [J].
Jun-Ou, J. ;
Lojanapiwat, Bannakij .
INTERNATIONAL BRAZ J UROL, 2010, 36 (02) :171-176