URS for de-novo urolithiasis after kidney transplantation: a systematic review of the literature.

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Minerva Urology and Nephrology Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-31 DOI:10.23736/S2724-6051.24.05683-0
Clara Cerrato, Carlotta Nedbal, Victoria Jahrreiss, Francesco Ripa, Vincenzo DE Marco, Manoj Monga, Belthangady M Hameed, Peter Kronenberg, Amelia Pietropaolo, Nitesh Naik, Bhaskar Somani
{"title":"URS for de-novo urolithiasis after kidney transplantation: a systematic review of the literature.","authors":"Clara Cerrato, Carlotta Nedbal, Victoria Jahrreiss, Francesco Ripa, Vincenzo DE Marco, Manoj Monga, Belthangady M Hameed, Peter Kronenberg, Amelia Pietropaolo, Nitesh Naik, Bhaskar Somani","doi":"10.23736/S2724-6051.24.05683-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>There is a gap in the available literature and guidelines concerning the optimal approach for treating allograft stones, which currently include external shockwave lithotripsy, ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy, or percutaneous nephrolithotomy. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of URS as a treatment option for patients in this scenario.</p><p><strong>Evidence acquisition: </strong>A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted until August 2023. Only original articles written in English were considered for inclusion. This review has been registered in PROSPERO (registration number CRD42023451154).</p><p><strong>Evidence synthesis: </strong>Eleven articles were included (122 patients). The mean age was 46.9±9.5 years, with a male-to-female ratio of 62:49. The preferred ureteral reimplantation technique was the Lich-Gregoire. The mean onset time was 48.24 months. Acute kidney injury, urinary tract infections and fever were the most frequent clinical presentations (18.3% each), followed by hematuria (10%). The mean stone size measured 9.84 mm (±2.42 mm). Flexible URS was preferred over semirigid URS. The stone-free rate stood at 83.35%, while the overall complication rate was 13.93%, with six (4.9%) major complications reported. Stones were mainly composed of calcium oxalate (42.6%) or uric acid (14.8%). Over an average follow-up period of 30.2 months, the recurrence rate was 2.46%. No significant changes in renal function or allograft loss were reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>URS remains an efficient choice for addressing de-novo allograft urolithiasis, offering the advantage of treating urinary stones with a good SFR and a low incidence of complications. Procedures should be performed in an Endourology referral center.</p>","PeriodicalId":53228,"journal":{"name":"Minerva Urology and Nephrology","volume":" ","pages":"286-294"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva Urology and Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6051.24.05683-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: There is a gap in the available literature and guidelines concerning the optimal approach for treating allograft stones, which currently include external shockwave lithotripsy, ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy, or percutaneous nephrolithotomy. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of URS as a treatment option for patients in this scenario.

Evidence acquisition: A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted until August 2023. Only original articles written in English were considered for inclusion. This review has been registered in PROSPERO (registration number CRD42023451154).

Evidence synthesis: Eleven articles were included (122 patients). The mean age was 46.9±9.5 years, with a male-to-female ratio of 62:49. The preferred ureteral reimplantation technique was the Lich-Gregoire. The mean onset time was 48.24 months. Acute kidney injury, urinary tract infections and fever were the most frequent clinical presentations (18.3% each), followed by hematuria (10%). The mean stone size measured 9.84 mm (±2.42 mm). Flexible URS was preferred over semirigid URS. The stone-free rate stood at 83.35%, while the overall complication rate was 13.93%, with six (4.9%) major complications reported. Stones were mainly composed of calcium oxalate (42.6%) or uric acid (14.8%). Over an average follow-up period of 30.2 months, the recurrence rate was 2.46%. No significant changes in renal function or allograft loss were reported.

Conclusions: URS remains an efficient choice for addressing de-novo allograft urolithiasis, offering the advantage of treating urinary stones with a good SFR and a low incidence of complications. Procedures should be performed in an Endourology referral center.

肾移植后新发尿路结石的尿路造影术:文献系统回顾。
导言:目前,治疗同种异体结石的最佳方法包括体外冲击波碎石、输尿管镜检查和激光碎石或经皮肾镜取石术。本系统性综述的目的是评估尿路碎石术作为这种情况下患者的治疗方案的安全性和有效性:对截至 2023 年 8 月的文献进行了全面检索。仅考虑纳入以英语撰写的原创文章。本综述已在 PROSPERO 注册(注册号为 CRD42023451154):共纳入 11 篇文章(122 名患者)。平均年龄为 46.9±9.5 岁,男女比例为 62:49。首选的输尿管再植技术是Lich-Gregoire技术。平均发病时间为 48.24 个月。急性肾损伤、尿路感染和发热是最常见的临床表现(各占18.3%),其次是血尿(10%)。结石的平均大小为 9.84 毫米(±2.42 毫米)。与半硬性尿路造影术相比,患者更倾向于采用软性尿路造影术。无结石率为 83.35%,总并发症率为 13.93%,其中主要并发症有 6 例(4.9%)。结石主要由草酸钙(42.6%)或尿酸(14.8%)组成。平均随访时间为 30.2 个月,复发率为 2.46%。肾功能和异体移植损失均无明显变化:结论:URS仍是治疗新发异体尿路结石的有效选择,其优势在于治疗尿路结石的SFR良好,并发症发生率低。手术应在内科转诊中心进行。
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
Minerva Urology and Nephrology
Minerva Urology and Nephrology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
32.70%
发文量
237
×
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