Suction use in ureterorenoscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

IF 1.6 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
BJUI compass Pub Date : 2024-07-08 DOI:10.1002/bco2.408
Lazaros Tzelves, Robert Geraghty, Patrick Juliebø-Jones, Yuhong Yuan, Konstantinos Kapriniotis, Daniele Castellani, Vineet Gauhar, Andreas Skolarikos, Bhaskar Somani
{"title":"Suction use in ureterorenoscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies","authors":"Lazaros Tzelves,&nbsp;Robert Geraghty,&nbsp;Patrick Juliebø-Jones,&nbsp;Yuhong Yuan,&nbsp;Konstantinos Kapriniotis,&nbsp;Daniele Castellani,&nbsp;Vineet Gauhar,&nbsp;Andreas Skolarikos,&nbsp;Bhaskar Somani","doi":"10.1002/bco2.408","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>Ureterorenoscopy is seeing a bloom of technological advances, one of which is incorporating suction. The objective of this study is to systematically review existing literature regarding suction use in rigid and flexible ureterorenoscopy and perform meta-analysis of studies comparing suction versus no suction ureteroscopy or mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A literature search was performed (November 2023) in MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL. Study protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42023482360). Comparative studies (observational and randomized) were eligible for inclusion if they compared suction versus no suction group and reported at least one primary outcome of interest (stone-free or complication rate).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Sixteen studies (5 randomized and 11 observational), analysing 1086 and 1109 patients in standard and suction groups, respectively, were included. Final stone-free rates (SFRs), overall and infectious complications and length of hospital stay exhibited significant improvement when suction was used. When mini-PCNL was compared with flexible ureterorenoscopy with suction, no differences were found in terms of stone-free and infectious complications rates.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Ureterorenoscopy is a commonly performed endoscopic procedure for urolithiasis treatment, the success of which is defined by SFRs and complication rates. Application of suction via ureteral access sheaths, ureteral catheters or scopes may provide improved SFRs, reduced overall and infectious complication rates, along with a reduction in length of hospital stay. Further randomized studies are needed to validate these findings and standardize indications and protocols.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":72420,"journal":{"name":"BJUI compass","volume":"5 10","pages":"895-912"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bco2.408","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJUI compass","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bco2.408","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

Ureterorenoscopy is seeing a bloom of technological advances, one of which is incorporating suction. The objective of this study is to systematically review existing literature regarding suction use in rigid and flexible ureterorenoscopy and perform meta-analysis of studies comparing suction versus no suction ureteroscopy or mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).

Methods

A literature search was performed (November 2023) in MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL. Study protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42023482360). Comparative studies (observational and randomized) were eligible for inclusion if they compared suction versus no suction group and reported at least one primary outcome of interest (stone-free or complication rate).

Results

Sixteen studies (5 randomized and 11 observational), analysing 1086 and 1109 patients in standard and suction groups, respectively, were included. Final stone-free rates (SFRs), overall and infectious complications and length of hospital stay exhibited significant improvement when suction was used. When mini-PCNL was compared with flexible ureterorenoscopy with suction, no differences were found in terms of stone-free and infectious complications rates.

Conclusions

Ureterorenoscopy is a commonly performed endoscopic procedure for urolithiasis treatment, the success of which is defined by SFRs and complication rates. Application of suction via ureteral access sheaths, ureteral catheters or scopes may provide improved SFRs, reduced overall and infectious complication rates, along with a reduction in length of hospital stay. Further randomized studies are needed to validate these findings and standardize indications and protocols.

Abstract Image

输尿管镜检查中的吸管使用:比较研究的系统回顾和荟萃分析
输尿管镜检查技术的发展日新月异,其中之一就是采用了抽吸技术。本研究的目的是系统回顾有关在刚性和柔性输尿管镜检查中使用抽吸术的现有文献,并对比较抽吸与不抽吸输尿管镜检查或迷你经皮肾镜碎石术(PCNL)的研究进行荟萃分析。研究方案已在 PROSPERO 注册(CRD42023482360)。16 项研究(5 项随机研究和 11 项观察研究)分别对标准组和抽吸组的 1086 名和 1109 名患者进行了分析。使用抽吸法后,最终无结石率(SFR)、总体并发症和感染性并发症以及住院时间均有显著改善。输尿管镜检查是治疗尿路结石的常用内镜手术,其成功与否取决于无结石率和并发症发生率。通过输尿管通路鞘、输尿管导管或探针进行抽吸可提高无感染率,降低总并发症和感染性并发症的发生率,同时缩短住院时间。还需要进一步的随机研究来验证这些发现,并规范适应症和方案。
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
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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