Cargando…

Comparison of intrarenal pelvic pressure and postoperative fever between standard- and mini-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND: High intrarenal pelvic pressure (IPP) induces systemic absorption of irrigation fluid containing bacteria or endotoxins, which is associated with postoperative fever (POF) and even urosepsis. The emphasis of this meta-analysis lies in comparison of IPP and POF between mini-tract percutan...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Feng, Dechao, Zeng, Xiongfeng, Han, Ping, Wei, Xin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: AME Publishing Company 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7354290/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32676399
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau.2020.03.30
_version_ 1783558052318806016
author Feng, Dechao
Zeng, Xiongfeng
Han, Ping
Wei, Xin
author_facet Feng, Dechao
Zeng, Xiongfeng
Han, Ping
Wei, Xin
author_sort Feng, Dechao
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: High intrarenal pelvic pressure (IPP) induces systemic absorption of irrigation fluid containing bacteria or endotoxins, which is associated with postoperative fever (POF) and even urosepsis. The emphasis of this meta-analysis lies in comparison of IPP and POF between mini-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) and standard-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SPCNL). METHODS: Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from electronic databases from inception to November 2019. Studies selection, quality assessment, data extraction and analysis were accomplished by two independent reviewers using Cochrane Collaboration’s tools. RESULTS: Patients in the MPCNL group experienced higher IPP compared to SPCNL group [mean difference (MD): 8.31, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.67–12.96, P=0.0005] with highly between-study heterogeneity (P=0.001, I(2)=85%). Notably, the IPP was higher in MPCNL group in different stages of the procedure including introduction, fragmentation and end. However, only two trials were available for pooled analysis. Additionally, the risk of POF in MPCNL was 2.43 times higher than that in SPCNL [odds ratio (OR): 2.43, 95% CI: 1.39–4.27, P=0.002] with no significant between-study heterogeneity (P=0.83, I(2)=0%). The two procedures was comparable on stone-free rate (SFR) (OR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.61–1.86, P=0.83) and operation time (MD: 5.69, 95% CI: −4.54 to 15.91, P=0.28). CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence indicates that MPCNL is an effective alternative to SPCNL with comparable SFR. IPP and POF is significantly higher during MPCNL compared to SPCNL. Intraoperative detection of IPP is of great significance for ensuring safety and reducing postoperative complications, especially for patients with MPCNL and the duration of stone fragmentation. Further large well-designed trials are warranted to confirm our findings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7354290
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher AME Publishing Company
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73542902020-07-15 Comparison of intrarenal pelvic pressure and postoperative fever between standard- and mini-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Feng, Dechao Zeng, Xiongfeng Han, Ping Wei, Xin Transl Androl Urol Original Article BACKGROUND: High intrarenal pelvic pressure (IPP) induces systemic absorption of irrigation fluid containing bacteria or endotoxins, which is associated with postoperative fever (POF) and even urosepsis. The emphasis of this meta-analysis lies in comparison of IPP and POF between mini-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) and standard-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SPCNL). METHODS: Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from electronic databases from inception to November 2019. Studies selection, quality assessment, data extraction and analysis were accomplished by two independent reviewers using Cochrane Collaboration’s tools. RESULTS: Patients in the MPCNL group experienced higher IPP compared to SPCNL group [mean difference (MD): 8.31, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.67–12.96, P=0.0005] with highly between-study heterogeneity (P=0.001, I(2)=85%). Notably, the IPP was higher in MPCNL group in different stages of the procedure including introduction, fragmentation and end. However, only two trials were available for pooled analysis. Additionally, the risk of POF in MPCNL was 2.43 times higher than that in SPCNL [odds ratio (OR): 2.43, 95% CI: 1.39–4.27, P=0.002] with no significant between-study heterogeneity (P=0.83, I(2)=0%). The two procedures was comparable on stone-free rate (SFR) (OR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.61–1.86, P=0.83) and operation time (MD: 5.69, 95% CI: −4.54 to 15.91, P=0.28). CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence indicates that MPCNL is an effective alternative to SPCNL with comparable SFR. IPP and POF is significantly higher during MPCNL compared to SPCNL. Intraoperative detection of IPP is of great significance for ensuring safety and reducing postoperative complications, especially for patients with MPCNL and the duration of stone fragmentation. Further large well-designed trials are warranted to confirm our findings. AME Publishing Company 2020-06 /pmc/articles/PMC7354290/ /pubmed/32676399 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau.2020.03.30 Text en 2020 Translational Andrology and Urology. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Feng, Dechao
Zeng, Xiongfeng
Han, Ping
Wei, Xin
Comparison of intrarenal pelvic pressure and postoperative fever between standard- and mini-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title Comparison of intrarenal pelvic pressure and postoperative fever between standard- and mini-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_full Comparison of intrarenal pelvic pressure and postoperative fever between standard- and mini-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_fullStr Comparison of intrarenal pelvic pressure and postoperative fever between standard- and mini-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of intrarenal pelvic pressure and postoperative fever between standard- and mini-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_short Comparison of intrarenal pelvic pressure and postoperative fever between standard- and mini-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_sort comparison of intrarenal pelvic pressure and postoperative fever between standard- and mini-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7354290/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32676399
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau.2020.03.30
work_keys_str_mv AT fengdechao comparisonofintrarenalpelvicpressureandpostoperativefeverbetweenstandardandminitractpercutaneousnephrolithotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT zengxiongfeng comparisonofintrarenalpelvicpressureandpostoperativefeverbetweenstandardandminitractpercutaneousnephrolithotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT hanping comparisonofintrarenalpelvicpressureandpostoperativefeverbetweenstandardandminitractpercutaneousnephrolithotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT weixin comparisonofintrarenalpelvicpressureandpostoperativefeverbetweenstandardandminitractpercutaneousnephrolithotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials