Cargando…

Evaluation of three stone-scoring systems for predicting SFR and complications after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Clinical studies assessing the feasibility and accuracy of three stone scoring systems’s (SSSs: Guy’s stone score, CROES nomogram and S.T.O.N.E nephrolithometry scoring system) have reported contradictory outcomes. This systematic evaluation was performed to obtain comprehensive evidence...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jiang, Kehua, Sun, Fa, Zhu, Jianguo, Luo, Guangheng, Zhang, Peng, Ban, Yong, Shan, Gang, Liu, Changxiang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6604199/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31262284
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-019-0488-y
_version_ 1783431665950916608
author Jiang, Kehua
Sun, Fa
Zhu, Jianguo
Luo, Guangheng
Zhang, Peng
Ban, Yong
Shan, Gang
Liu, Changxiang
author_facet Jiang, Kehua
Sun, Fa
Zhu, Jianguo
Luo, Guangheng
Zhang, Peng
Ban, Yong
Shan, Gang
Liu, Changxiang
author_sort Jiang, Kehua
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Clinical studies assessing the feasibility and accuracy of three stone scoring systems’s (SSSs: Guy’s stone score, CROES nomogram and S.T.O.N.E nephrolithometry scoring system) have reported contradictory outcomes. This systematic evaluation was performed to obtain comprehensive evidence with regard to the feasibility and accuracy of three SSSs. METHODS: A systematic search of Embase, Pubmed, Medline, and the Cochrane Library was conducted to identify studies that compared three SSSs up to Mar 2018. Patients were categorized according to stone free (SF) and no-stone free (NSF), Outcomes of interest included perioperative variables, stone-free rate (SFR), and complications. RESULTS: Ten studies estimating three SSSs were included for meta-analysis. The results showed that SF patients had a significantly lower proportion of male (OR = 1.48, P = 0.0007), lower stone burden (WMD = -504.28, P < 0.0001), fewer No of involved calyces (OR = -1.23, P = 0.0007) and lower proportion of staghorn stone (OR = 0.33, P < 0.0001). Moreover, SF patients had significantly lower score of Guy score (WMD = -0.64, P < 0.0001), but, S.T.O.N.E. score (WMD = -1.23, P < 0.0001) and a higher score of CROES nomogram (WMD = 29.48, P = 0.003). However, the comparison of area under curves (AUC) of predicting SFR indicated that there was no remarkable difference between three SSSs. Nonetheless, Guy score was the only stone scoring system that predicted complications after PCNL (WMD = -0.29, 95% CI: − 0.57 to − 0.02, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis indicated that the three SSSs were equally, feasible and accurate for predicting SFR after PCNL. However, Guy score was the only stone scoring system that predicted complications after PCNL. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12894-019-0488-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6604199
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66041992019-07-12 Evaluation of three stone-scoring systems for predicting SFR and complications after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis Jiang, Kehua Sun, Fa Zhu, Jianguo Luo, Guangheng Zhang, Peng Ban, Yong Shan, Gang Liu, Changxiang BMC Urol Research Article BACKGROUND: Clinical studies assessing the feasibility and accuracy of three stone scoring systems’s (SSSs: Guy’s stone score, CROES nomogram and S.T.O.N.E nephrolithometry scoring system) have reported contradictory outcomes. This systematic evaluation was performed to obtain comprehensive evidence with regard to the feasibility and accuracy of three SSSs. METHODS: A systematic search of Embase, Pubmed, Medline, and the Cochrane Library was conducted to identify studies that compared three SSSs up to Mar 2018. Patients were categorized according to stone free (SF) and no-stone free (NSF), Outcomes of interest included perioperative variables, stone-free rate (SFR), and complications. RESULTS: Ten studies estimating three SSSs were included for meta-analysis. The results showed that SF patients had a significantly lower proportion of male (OR = 1.48, P = 0.0007), lower stone burden (WMD = -504.28, P < 0.0001), fewer No of involved calyces (OR = -1.23, P = 0.0007) and lower proportion of staghorn stone (OR = 0.33, P < 0.0001). Moreover, SF patients had significantly lower score of Guy score (WMD = -0.64, P < 0.0001), but, S.T.O.N.E. score (WMD = -1.23, P < 0.0001) and a higher score of CROES nomogram (WMD = 29.48, P = 0.003). However, the comparison of area under curves (AUC) of predicting SFR indicated that there was no remarkable difference between three SSSs. Nonetheless, Guy score was the only stone scoring system that predicted complications after PCNL (WMD = -0.29, 95% CI: − 0.57 to − 0.02, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis indicated that the three SSSs were equally, feasible and accurate for predicting SFR after PCNL. However, Guy score was the only stone scoring system that predicted complications after PCNL. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12894-019-0488-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-07-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6604199/ /pubmed/31262284 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-019-0488-y Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Jiang, Kehua
Sun, Fa
Zhu, Jianguo
Luo, Guangheng
Zhang, Peng
Ban, Yong
Shan, Gang
Liu, Changxiang
Evaluation of three stone-scoring systems for predicting SFR and complications after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Evaluation of three stone-scoring systems for predicting SFR and complications after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Evaluation of three stone-scoring systems for predicting SFR and complications after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Evaluation of three stone-scoring systems for predicting SFR and complications after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of three stone-scoring systems for predicting SFR and complications after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Evaluation of three stone-scoring systems for predicting SFR and complications after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort evaluation of three stone-scoring systems for predicting sfr and complications after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6604199/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31262284
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-019-0488-y
work_keys_str_mv AT jiangkehua evaluationofthreestonescoringsystemsforpredictingsfrandcomplicationsafterpercutaneousnephrolithotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT sunfa evaluationofthreestonescoringsystemsforpredictingsfrandcomplicationsafterpercutaneousnephrolithotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT zhujianguo evaluationofthreestonescoringsystemsforpredictingsfrandcomplicationsafterpercutaneousnephrolithotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT luoguangheng evaluationofthreestonescoringsystemsforpredictingsfrandcomplicationsafterpercutaneousnephrolithotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT zhangpeng evaluationofthreestonescoringsystemsforpredictingsfrandcomplicationsafterpercutaneousnephrolithotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT banyong evaluationofthreestonescoringsystemsforpredictingsfrandcomplicationsafterpercutaneousnephrolithotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT shangang evaluationofthreestonescoringsystemsforpredictingsfrandcomplicationsafterpercutaneousnephrolithotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT liuchangxiang evaluationofthreestonescoringsystemsforpredictingsfrandcomplicationsafterpercutaneousnephrolithotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis