Ultrasound versus fluoroscopy as imaging guidance for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Razman Arabzadeh Bahri, Saba Maleki, Arman Shafiee, Parnian Shobeiri
{"title":"Ultrasound versus fluoroscopy as imaging guidance for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Razman Arabzadeh Bahri, Saba Maleki, Arman Shafiee, Parnian Shobeiri","doi":"10.1101/2022.10.13.22281046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: To determine whether the outcomes of ultrasound-guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UG-PCNL), an alternative to traditional fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy (FG-PCNL), are comparable.\nMethods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was carried out to discover investigations comparing UG-PCNL to FG-PCNL, and accordingly, a meta-analysis of those studies was performed. The primary outcomes included the stone-free rate (SFR), overall complications based on Clavien-Dindo classification, duration of surgery, duration of patients’ hospitalization, and hemoglobin (Hb) drop during the surgery. All statistical analyses and visualizations were implemented utilizing R software.\nResults: Nineteen studies, including eight randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and eleven observational cohorts, comprising 3016 patients (1521 UG-PCNL patients) and comparing UG-PCNL with FG-PCNL met the inclusion criteria of the current study. Considering SFR, overall complications, duration of surgery, duration of hospitalization, and Hb drop, our meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant difference between UG-PCNL and FG-PCNL patients, with p-values of 0.29, 0.47, 0.98, 0.28, and 0.42, respectively. Significant differences were discovered between UG-PCNL and FG-PCNL patients in terms of the length of time they were exposed to radiation (p-value< 0.0001). Moreover, FG-PCNL had shorter access time than UG-PCNL (p-value= 0.04).\nConclusion: UG-PCNL provides the advantage of requiring less radiation exposure while being just as efficient as FG-PCNL; thus, this study suggests prioritizing the use of UG-PCNL.","PeriodicalId":501140,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Urology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.10.13.22281046","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To determine whether the outcomes of ultrasound-guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UG-PCNL), an alternative to traditional fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy (FG-PCNL), are comparable. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was carried out to discover investigations comparing UG-PCNL to FG-PCNL, and accordingly, a meta-analysis of those studies was performed. The primary outcomes included the stone-free rate (SFR), overall complications based on Clavien-Dindo classification, duration of surgery, duration of patients’ hospitalization, and hemoglobin (Hb) drop during the surgery. All statistical analyses and visualizations were implemented utilizing R software. Results: Nineteen studies, including eight randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and eleven observational cohorts, comprising 3016 patients (1521 UG-PCNL patients) and comparing UG-PCNL with FG-PCNL met the inclusion criteria of the current study. Considering SFR, overall complications, duration of surgery, duration of hospitalization, and Hb drop, our meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant difference between UG-PCNL and FG-PCNL patients, with p-values of 0.29, 0.47, 0.98, 0.28, and 0.42, respectively. Significant differences were discovered between UG-PCNL and FG-PCNL patients in terms of the length of time they were exposed to radiation (p-value< 0.0001). Moreover, FG-PCNL had shorter access time than UG-PCNL (p-value= 0.04). Conclusion: UG-PCNL provides the advantage of requiring less radiation exposure while being just as efficient as FG-PCNL; thus, this study suggests prioritizing the use of UG-PCNL.
超声与透视作为经皮肾镜取石术的影像学指导:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析
目的:探讨超声引导下经皮肾镜取石术(UG-PCNL)与传统透视引导下经皮肾镜取石术(FG-PCNL)的疗效是否具有可比性。方法:系统检索PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆,发现UG-PCNL与FG-PCNL的比较研究,并对这些研究进行荟萃分析。主要结局包括无结石率(SFR)、基于Clavien-Dindo分类的总并发症、手术时间、患者住院时间和手术期间血红蛋白(Hb)下降。所有统计分析和可视化均使用R软件实现。结果:19项研究,包括8项随机临床试验(RCTs)和11项观察性队列,共计3016例患者(1521例UG-PCNL患者),UG-PCNL与FG-PCNL的比较符合本研究的纳入标准。综合考虑SFR、总并发症、手术时间、住院时间、Hb下降等因素,我们的meta分析显示UG-PCNL与FG-PCNL患者的差异无统计学意义,p值分别为0.29、0.47、0.98、0.28、0.42。UG-PCNL和FG-PCNL患者在辐射暴露时间方面存在显著差异(p值<0.0001)。FG-PCNL的访问时间较UG-PCNL短(p值= 0.04)。结论:UG-PCNL具有与FG-PCNL相同的低辐射照射的优点;因此,本研究建议优先使用UG-PCNL。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信