输尿管镜和激光碎石术治疗肾结石的效果:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 1.9 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Central European Journal of Urology Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-25 DOI:10.5173/ceju.2024.0196
James Connor, Steven Anderson, Niall F Davis
{"title":"输尿管镜和激光碎石术治疗肾结石的效果:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"James Connor, Steven Anderson, Niall F Davis","doi":"10.5173/ceju.2024.0196","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The use of ureteral access sheaths (UASs) is an issue of contention among urologists, with their efficacy unclear in retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess RIRS with laser lithotripsy for the treatment of urolithiasis with and without the use of UASs.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A systematic literature search was conducted in July 2023 using MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane library. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottowa scale and Cochrane collaboration risk of bias tool. The primary outcome measures were stone-free rate (SFR), and post-operative complications. Secondary outcomes were operative time (OT), hospital length of stay (LOS) and ureteral injury rate. Effect sizes were calculated by pooled risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with confidence intervals (CIs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 16 studies met the inclusion criteria. There were 3,123 participants who had RIRS with a UAS and 1,478 without. Pooled analysis revealed no significant difference between groups in SFR (RR = 1.03, 95% CI: 0.99-1.07), complication rate (RR = 1.31, 95% CI: 1.00-1.73), ureteral injuries (RR = 1.13, 95% CI: 0.77-1.65) or LOS (MD = -0.01, 95% CI: from -0.08 to 0.11). OT was significantly longer in the UAS group (MD = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.01-0.7).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results of this meta-analysis demonstrate that the use of UASs during RIRS does not improve post-operative outcomes and is associated with a longer OT. While there are still times where the use of UASs may be beneficial, their routine use for patients undergoing RIRS is not currently indicated.</p>","PeriodicalId":9744,"journal":{"name":"Central European Journal of Urology","volume":"78 2","pages":"228-236"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12379812/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Outcomes of ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy with and without ureteral access sheaths for the treatment of renal calculi: A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"James Connor, Steven Anderson, Niall F Davis\",\"doi\":\"10.5173/ceju.2024.0196\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The use of ureteral access sheaths (UASs) is an issue of contention among urologists, with their efficacy unclear in retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess RIRS with laser lithotripsy for the treatment of urolithiasis with and without the use of UASs.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A systematic literature search was conducted in July 2023 using MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane library. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottowa scale and Cochrane collaboration risk of bias tool. The primary outcome measures were stone-free rate (SFR), and post-operative complications. Secondary outcomes were operative time (OT), hospital length of stay (LOS) and ureteral injury rate. Effect sizes were calculated by pooled risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with confidence intervals (CIs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 16 studies met the inclusion criteria. There were 3,123 participants who had RIRS with a UAS and 1,478 without. Pooled analysis revealed no significant difference between groups in SFR (RR = 1.03, 95% CI: 0.99-1.07), complication rate (RR = 1.31, 95% CI: 1.00-1.73), ureteral injuries (RR = 1.13, 95% CI: 0.77-1.65) or LOS (MD = -0.01, 95% CI: from -0.08 to 0.11). OT was significantly longer in the UAS group (MD = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.01-0.7).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results of this meta-analysis demonstrate that the use of UASs during RIRS does not improve post-operative outcomes and is associated with a longer OT. While there are still times where the use of UASs may be beneficial, their routine use for patients undergoing RIRS is not currently indicated.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9744,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Central European Journal of Urology\",\"volume\":\"78 2\",\"pages\":\"228-236\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12379812/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Central European Journal of Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2024.0196\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/5/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Central European Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2024.0196","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导读:输尿管通路鞘(UASs)的使用是泌尿科医生争论的一个问题,其在逆行肾内手术(RIRS)中的疗效尚不清楚。因此,我们进行了一项系统回顾和荟萃分析,以评估激光碎石术联合RIRS治疗尿石症是否使用UASs。材料和方法:于2023年7月使用MEDLINE、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆进行系统文献检索。纳入研究的质量采用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表和Cochrane合作偏倚风险工具进行评估。主要观察指标为无结石率(SFR)和术后并发症。次要结果为手术时间(OT)、住院时间(LOS)和输尿管损伤率。效应大小通过合并风险比(rr)和带置信区间(ci)的平均差异(MDs)计算。结果:共有16项研究符合纳入标准。有3123名参与者有RIRS和UAS, 1478名没有。合并分析显示,两组间SFR (RR = 1.03, 95% CI: 0.99-1.07)、并发症发生率(RR = 1.31, 95% CI: 1.00-1.73)、输尿管损伤(RR = 1.13, 95% CI: 0.77-1.65)或LOS (MD = -0.01, 95% CI: -0.08 - 0.11)无显著差异。UAS组OT时间明显延长(MD = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.01-0.7)。结论:本荟萃分析的结果表明,在RIRS期间使用UASs并不能改善术后预后,并且与更长时间的OT相关。虽然在某些情况下使用UASs可能是有益的,但目前还没有对接受RIRS的患者进行常规使用的迹象。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Outcomes of ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy with and without ureteral access sheaths for the treatment of renal calculi: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Outcomes of ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy with and without ureteral access sheaths for the treatment of renal calculi: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Outcomes of ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy with and without ureteral access sheaths for the treatment of renal calculi: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Outcomes of ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy with and without ureteral access sheaths for the treatment of renal calculi: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Introduction: The use of ureteral access sheaths (UASs) is an issue of contention among urologists, with their efficacy unclear in retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess RIRS with laser lithotripsy for the treatment of urolithiasis with and without the use of UASs.

Material and methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in July 2023 using MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane library. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottowa scale and Cochrane collaboration risk of bias tool. The primary outcome measures were stone-free rate (SFR), and post-operative complications. Secondary outcomes were operative time (OT), hospital length of stay (LOS) and ureteral injury rate. Effect sizes were calculated by pooled risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with confidence intervals (CIs).

Results: In total, 16 studies met the inclusion criteria. There were 3,123 participants who had RIRS with a UAS and 1,478 without. Pooled analysis revealed no significant difference between groups in SFR (RR = 1.03, 95% CI: 0.99-1.07), complication rate (RR = 1.31, 95% CI: 1.00-1.73), ureteral injuries (RR = 1.13, 95% CI: 0.77-1.65) or LOS (MD = -0.01, 95% CI: from -0.08 to 0.11). OT was significantly longer in the UAS group (MD = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.01-0.7).

Conclusions: The results of this meta-analysis demonstrate that the use of UASs during RIRS does not improve post-operative outcomes and is associated with a longer OT. While there are still times where the use of UASs may be beneficial, their routine use for patients undergoing RIRS is not currently indicated.

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
Central European Journal of Urology
Central European Journal of Urology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
48
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信