马蹄形肾患者尿石症治疗方案的比较评价:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q4 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Yazan Qaoud, Merella Al Tali, Fiona Boland, Andrew Simpson, Niall Davis
{"title":"马蹄形肾患者尿石症治疗方案的比较评价:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Yazan Qaoud,&nbsp;Merella Al Tali,&nbsp;Fiona Boland,&nbsp;Andrew Simpson,&nbsp;Niall Davis","doi":"10.1097/CU9.0000000000000199","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Horseshoe kidney is a rare congenital anomaly commonly complicated by urolithiasis. Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL), ureteroscopy (URS), and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) are treatment options for horseshoe kidney stones. The aim of this systematic review is to compare the benefits and risks of these management options.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to February 2022. A total of 516 nonduplicate studies were screened against the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Studies comparing at least 2 interventions with ≥10 patients per intervention were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine retrospective observational studies published from 2007 to 2021 with a total of 565 patients were included. Reported mean ± SD or mean (range) stone sizes ranged between 17.90 ± 2.43 mm and 27.9 ± 8.6 mm for PCNL, 8.4 (2-25) mm and 22.3 ± 9.1 mm for URS, and 11.9 ± 2.0 mm and 16.8 ± 4.4 mm for ESWL. There was no difference in single-session and overall stone-free rate (SFR) between PCNL and URS, with a risk ratio of 1.04 (95% confidence interval, 0.95-1.13; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 20.63%). Ureteroscopy had better stone clearance than ESWL, with an overall SFR risk ratio of 1.38 (95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.82; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%). There was no statistically significant difference in overall SFR between PCNL and ESWL. Most patients who underwent URS and ESWL experienced Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade I-II complications. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy was associated with the highest complication rates, including 5 CD grade III and 3 CD grade IV complications and a mean postoperative hemoglobin drop of 0.47 to 1.83 g/dL. There were no CD grade V complications across all studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was no difference in SFR between PCNL and URS. Ureteroscopy was associated with a smaller stone burden and fewer and less severe complications. Ureteroscopy was found to be more effective than ESWL with a higher SFR and comparable safety profile. Further large-scale randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":39147,"journal":{"name":"Current Urology","volume":"17 3","pages":"193-205"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/9d/04/curr-urol-17-193.PMC10337821.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative evaluation of urolithiasis management options in patients with horseshoe kidney: A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Yazan Qaoud,&nbsp;Merella Al Tali,&nbsp;Fiona Boland,&nbsp;Andrew Simpson,&nbsp;Niall Davis\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/CU9.0000000000000199\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Horseshoe kidney is a rare congenital anomaly commonly complicated by urolithiasis. Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL), ureteroscopy (URS), and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) are treatment options for horseshoe kidney stones. The aim of this systematic review is to compare the benefits and risks of these management options.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to February 2022. A total of 516 nonduplicate studies were screened against the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Studies comparing at least 2 interventions with ≥10 patients per intervention were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine retrospective observational studies published from 2007 to 2021 with a total of 565 patients were included. Reported mean ± SD or mean (range) stone sizes ranged between 17.90 ± 2.43 mm and 27.9 ± 8.6 mm for PCNL, 8.4 (2-25) mm and 22.3 ± 9.1 mm for URS, and 11.9 ± 2.0 mm and 16.8 ± 4.4 mm for ESWL. There was no difference in single-session and overall stone-free rate (SFR) between PCNL and URS, with a risk ratio of 1.04 (95% confidence interval, 0.95-1.13; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 20.63%). Ureteroscopy had better stone clearance than ESWL, with an overall SFR risk ratio of 1.38 (95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.82; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%). There was no statistically significant difference in overall SFR between PCNL and ESWL. Most patients who underwent URS and ESWL experienced Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade I-II complications. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy was associated with the highest complication rates, including 5 CD grade III and 3 CD grade IV complications and a mean postoperative hemoglobin drop of 0.47 to 1.83 g/dL. There were no CD grade V complications across all studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was no difference in SFR between PCNL and URS. Ureteroscopy was associated with a smaller stone burden and fewer and less severe complications. Ureteroscopy was found to be more effective than ESWL with a higher SFR and comparable safety profile. Further large-scale randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39147,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Urology\",\"volume\":\"17 3\",\"pages\":\"193-205\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/9d/04/curr-urol-17-193.PMC10337821.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/CU9.0000000000000199\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CU9.0000000000000199","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:马蹄肾是一种罕见的先天性异常,常并发尿石症。体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)、输尿管镜检查(URS)和经皮肾镜取石术(PCNL)是马蹄形肾结石的治疗选择。本系统综述的目的是比较这些管理方案的收益和风险。方法:检索MEDLINE、EMBASE和Cochrane Library数据库,检索时间为建库至2022年2月。根据纳入和排除标准,共筛选了516项非重复研究。纳入了比较至少两种干预措施,每种干预措施≥10例患者的研究。结果:2007年至2021年间发表的9项回顾性观察性研究,共纳入565例患者。报告的平均±SD或平均(范围)结石大小范围为PCNL为17.90±2.43 mm至27.9±8.6 mm, URS为8.4 (2-25)mm至22.3±9.1 mm, ESWL为11.9±2.0 mm至16.8±4.4 mm。PCNL和URS之间的单次治疗和总结石清除率(SFR)无差异,风险比为1.04(95%可信区间,0.95-1.13;I2 = 20.63%)。输尿管镜比ESWL有更好的结石清除,总体SFR风险比为1.38(95%可信区间,1.04-1.82;I2 = 0%)。PCNL与ESWL的总SFR差异无统计学意义。大多数接受URS和ESWL的患者出现了Clavien-Dindo (CD) I-II级并发症。经皮肾镜取石术并发症发生率最高,包括5例CD III级和3例CD IV级并发症,术后平均血红蛋白下降0.47 ~ 1.83 g/dL。所有研究均未发现CD V级并发症。结论:PCNL与URS的SFR无显著差异。输尿管镜检查的结石负担较小,并发症也较少。输尿管镜检查被发现比ESWL更有效,具有更高的SFR和相当的安全性。需要进一步的大规模随机对照试验来证实这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparative evaluation of urolithiasis management options in patients with horseshoe kidney: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Comparative evaluation of urolithiasis management options in patients with horseshoe kidney: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Comparative evaluation of urolithiasis management options in patients with horseshoe kidney: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Comparative evaluation of urolithiasis management options in patients with horseshoe kidney: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Horseshoe kidney is a rare congenital anomaly commonly complicated by urolithiasis. Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL), ureteroscopy (URS), and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) are treatment options for horseshoe kidney stones. The aim of this systematic review is to compare the benefits and risks of these management options.

Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to February 2022. A total of 516 nonduplicate studies were screened against the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Studies comparing at least 2 interventions with ≥10 patients per intervention were included.

Results: Nine retrospective observational studies published from 2007 to 2021 with a total of 565 patients were included. Reported mean ± SD or mean (range) stone sizes ranged between 17.90 ± 2.43 mm and 27.9 ± 8.6 mm for PCNL, 8.4 (2-25) mm and 22.3 ± 9.1 mm for URS, and 11.9 ± 2.0 mm and 16.8 ± 4.4 mm for ESWL. There was no difference in single-session and overall stone-free rate (SFR) between PCNL and URS, with a risk ratio of 1.04 (95% confidence interval, 0.95-1.13; I2 = 20.63%). Ureteroscopy had better stone clearance than ESWL, with an overall SFR risk ratio of 1.38 (95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.82; I2 = 0%). There was no statistically significant difference in overall SFR between PCNL and ESWL. Most patients who underwent URS and ESWL experienced Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade I-II complications. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy was associated with the highest complication rates, including 5 CD grade III and 3 CD grade IV complications and a mean postoperative hemoglobin drop of 0.47 to 1.83 g/dL. There were no CD grade V complications across all studies.

Conclusions: There was no difference in SFR between PCNL and URS. Ureteroscopy was associated with a smaller stone burden and fewer and less severe complications. Ureteroscopy was found to be more effective than ESWL with a higher SFR and comparable safety profile. Further large-scale randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Current Urology
Current Urology Medicine-Urology
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
96
×
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