Cargando…
Supine versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Background: The decision for using supine or prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is still debatable. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety profile of the supine and prone position when performing PCNL. Methods: A systematic electronic search was performed usin...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
F1000 Research Limited
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7509599/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33014345 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.22940.3 |
_version_ | 1783585632075907072 |
---|---|
author | Birowo, Ponco Tendi, William Widyahening, Indah S. Rasyid, Nur Atmoko, Widi |
author_facet | Birowo, Ponco Tendi, William Widyahening, Indah S. Rasyid, Nur Atmoko, Widi |
author_sort | Birowo, Ponco |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: The decision for using supine or prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is still debatable. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety profile of the supine and prone position when performing PCNL. Methods: A systematic electronic search was performed using the database from MEDLINE, Cochrane library and Google Scholar from January 2009 to November 2019. The outcomes assessed were stone free rate, major complication rate, length of hospital stay and mean operation time. Results: A total of 11 articles were included in qualitative and quantitative analysis. The efficacy of PCNL in supine position as determined by stone free rate is significantly lower than in prone position (OR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.66 – 0.83; p<0.00001), However, major complication rate is also lower in the supine group compared with the prone group (OR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.51 – 0.96; p=0.03). There is no statistically significant difference in the length of hospital stay and mean operation time between both groups. Conclusion: Prone position leads to a higher stone free rate, but also a higher rate of major complication. Thus, the decision of using which position during PCNL should be based on the surgeon’s experience and clinical aspects of the patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7509599 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | F1000 Research Limited |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75095992020-10-01 Supine versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis Birowo, Ponco Tendi, William Widyahening, Indah S. Rasyid, Nur Atmoko, Widi F1000Res Systematic Review Background: The decision for using supine or prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is still debatable. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety profile of the supine and prone position when performing PCNL. Methods: A systematic electronic search was performed using the database from MEDLINE, Cochrane library and Google Scholar from January 2009 to November 2019. The outcomes assessed were stone free rate, major complication rate, length of hospital stay and mean operation time. Results: A total of 11 articles were included in qualitative and quantitative analysis. The efficacy of PCNL in supine position as determined by stone free rate is significantly lower than in prone position (OR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.66 – 0.83; p<0.00001), However, major complication rate is also lower in the supine group compared with the prone group (OR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.51 – 0.96; p=0.03). There is no statistically significant difference in the length of hospital stay and mean operation time between both groups. Conclusion: Prone position leads to a higher stone free rate, but also a higher rate of major complication. Thus, the decision of using which position during PCNL should be based on the surgeon’s experience and clinical aspects of the patients. F1000 Research Limited 2020-09-15 /pmc/articles/PMC7509599/ /pubmed/33014345 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.22940.3 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Birowo P et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Systematic Review Birowo, Ponco Tendi, William Widyahening, Indah S. Rasyid, Nur Atmoko, Widi Supine versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Supine versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Supine versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Supine versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Supine versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Supine versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | supine versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Systematic Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7509599/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33014345 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.22940.3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT birowoponco supineversuspronepositioninpercutaneousnephrolithotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT tendiwilliam supineversuspronepositioninpercutaneousnephrolithotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT widyaheningindahs supineversuspronepositioninpercutaneousnephrolithotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT rasyidnur supineversuspronepositioninpercutaneousnephrolithotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT atmokowidi supineversuspronepositioninpercutaneousnephrolithotomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |