Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy improves stone-free rates for impacted proximal ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:11
作者
Gao, Zi-Ming [1 ]
Gao, Shan [2 ]
Qu, Hong-Chen [3 ]
Li, Kai [4 ]
Li, Ning [1 ]
Liu, Chun-Lai [1 ]
Zhu, Xing-Wang [1 ]
Liu, Yi-Li [1 ]
Wang, Ping [1 ]
Zheng, Xiao-Hua [5 ]
机构
[1] China Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp 4, Dept Urol Surg, Shenyang, Liaoning, Peoples R China
[2] China Med Univ, Shengjing Hosp, Dept Gynecol & Obstet, Shenyang, Liaoning, Peoples R China
[3] China Med Univ, Canc Hosp, Liaoning Canc Hosp, Dept Urol Surg, Shenyang, Liaoning, Peoples R China
[4] China Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp 1, Dept Surg Oncol, Shenyang, Liaoning, Peoples R China
[5] Peoples Liberat Army, Hosp 202, Dept Cardre Ward, Shenyang, Liaoning, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
RETROGRADE URETEROLITHOTRIPSY; ANTEGRADE URETEROLITHOTRIPSY; URETEROSCOPIC LITHOTRIPSY; FLEXIBLE URETEROSCOPY; CALCULI; EXPERIENCE; MANAGEMENT; PCNL;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0171230
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Background Urinary stones are common medical disorders and the treatment of impacted proximal ureteral stones (IPUS) is still a challenge for urologists. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MI-PCNL) and ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URL) in the treatment of IPUS via a meta-analysis. Methods We collected studies using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from 1978 to November 2016 and analyzed them using Stata 12.0 and RevMan 5.3. Odds ratios (ORs) and standard mean difference (SMD) were calculated for binary and continuous variables respectively, accompanied with 95% confidence intervals (Cis). All study procedures followed the PRISMA guidelines. Results Five prospective studies were included in our meta-analysis, with 242 MI-PCNL and 256 URL cases. MI-PCNL was associated with a longer postoperative hospital stay than URL (SMD, 3.14; 95% CI, 1.27 to 5.55). However, no significant difference was observed in operative time (SMD,-0.38; 95% CI,-3.15 to 2.38). In addition, MI-PCNL had higher initial (OR, 11.12; 95% CI, 5.56 to 22.24) and overall stone-free rates (OR, 8.70; 95% CI, 3.23 to 23.45) than URL, along with lower possibilities of surgical conversion (OR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.49) and postoperative shock wave lithotripsy (OR, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.18). Regarding complications, no significant differences were observed between MI-PCNL and URL (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.93 to 2.10), except for hematuria (OR, 4.80; 95% CI, 1.45 to 15.94). Conclusions MI-PCNL is optimal and should be considered as the preferred treatment method for IPUS, as it has better efficacy and a safety profile similar to that of URL. However, further high quality studies with larger sample size are required in future.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 19 条
[11]  
Mercimek Mehmet Necmettin, 2015, World J Nephrol, V4, P271, DOI 10.5527/wjn.v4.i2.271
[12]   Two-year experience with ureteral stones: Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy v ureteroscopic manipulation [J].
Park, H ;
Park, M ;
Park, T .
JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 1998, 12 (06) :501-504
[13]   Urolithiasis Treatment in Australia: The Age of Ureteroscopic Intervention [J].
Perera, Marlon ;
Papa, Nathan ;
Kinnear, Ned ;
Wetherell, David ;
Lawrentschuk, Nathan ;
Webb, David ;
Bolton, Damien .
JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2016, 30 (11) :1194-1199
[14]   Prevalence of Kidney Stones in the United States [J].
Scales, Charles D., Jr. ;
Smith, Alexandria C. ;
Hanley, Janet M. ;
Saigal, Christopher S. .
EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2012, 62 (01) :160-165
[15]   Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stones [J].
Srisubat, Attasit ;
Potisat, Somkiat ;
Lojanapiwat, Bannakij ;
Setthawong, Vasun ;
Laopaiboon, Malinee .
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2014, (11)
[16]   Treatment of large impacted proximal ureteral stones: Randomized comparison of percutaneous antegrade ureterolithotripsy versus retrograde ureterolithotripsy [J].
Sun, Xiaowen ;
Xia, Shujie ;
Lu, Jun ;
Liu, Haitao ;
Han, Bangmin ;
Li, Weiguo .
JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2008, 22 (05) :913-917
[17]   Semi-rigid ureteroscopic lithotripsy versus laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for large upper ureteral stones: a meta - analysis of randomized controlled trials [J].
Torricelli, Fabio C. M. ;
Monga, Manoj ;
Marchini, Giovanni S. ;
Srougi, Miguel ;
Nahas, William C. ;
Mazzucchi, Eduardo .
INTERNATIONAL BRAZ J UROL, 2016, 42 (04) :645-654
[18]   Comparative Study of Outcome in Treating Upper Ureteral Impacted Stones Using Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy With Aid of Patented System or Transurethral Ureteroscopy [J].
Yang, Zhongsheng ;
Song, Leming ;
Xie, Donghua ;
Hu, Min ;
Peng, Zuofeng ;
Liu, Tairong ;
Du, Chuance ;
Zhong, Jiuqing ;
Qing, Wen ;
Guo, Shulin ;
Zhu, Lunfeng ;
Yao, Lei ;
Huang, Jianrong ;
Fan, Difu ;
Ye, Zhangqun .
UROLOGY, 2012, 80 (06) :1192-1197
[19]   A Prospective Comparative Study Between Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Supine Position and Flexible Ureteroscopy in the Management of Single Large Stone in the Proximal Ureter [J].
Zhang, Yi ;
Yu, Cheng-fan ;
Jin, Shi-hua ;
Zhu, He ;
Na, Yan-qun .
UROLOGY, 2014, 83 (05) :999-1002