Cargando…
Efficacy and safety of various surgical treatments for proximal ureteral stone ≥10mm: A systematic review and network meta-analysis
PURPOSE: Various surgical options are available for large proximal ureteral stones, such as extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URSL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (LU). However, the best option remains controversial. Ther...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7527111/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32459455 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2019.0550 |
_version_ | 1783588984994136064 |
---|---|
author | Wang, Yaxuan Chang, Xueliang Li, Jingdong Han, Zhenwei |
author_facet | Wang, Yaxuan Chang, Xueliang Li, Jingdong Han, Zhenwei |
author_sort | Wang, Yaxuan |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Various surgical options are available for large proximal ureteral stones, such as extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URSL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (LU). However, the best option remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted a network meta-analysis comparing various surgical treatments for proximal ureteral stones ≥10mm to address current research deficiencies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched PubMed, Ovid, Scopus (up to June 2019), as well as citation lists to identify eligible comparative studies. All clinical studies including patients comparing surgical treatments for proximal ureteral stones ≥10mm were included. A standard network meta-analysis was performed with Stata SE 14 (Stata Corp, College Station, TX, USA) software to generate comparative statistics. The quality was assessed with level of evidence according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine and risk of bias with the Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manager (RevMan) 5.3 software. RESULTS: A total of 25 studies including 2.888 patients were included in this network meta-analysis. Network meta-analyses indicated that LU and PCNL had better stone-free rates and auxiliary procedures. PCNL could result in major complications and severe bleeding. In initial stone-free rate, final stone-free rate, and auxiliary procedures results, SUCRA ranking was: LU> PCNL> URSL> ESWL. In Clavien Dindo score ≥3 complications, SUCRA ranking was: LU> ESWL> URSL> PCNL. In fever, SUCRA ranking was: ESWL> LU> URSL> PCNL. In transfusion, SUCRA ranking was: LU> URSL> ESWL> PCNL. In Cluster analysis, LU had the highest advantages and acceptable side effects. Considering the traumatic nature of PCNL, it should not be an option over URSL. ESWL had the lowest advantages. CONCLUSIONS: LU have the potential to be considered as the first treatment choice of proximal ureteral stone ≥10mm. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7527111 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75271112020-10-14 Efficacy and safety of various surgical treatments for proximal ureteral stone ≥10mm: A systematic review and network meta-analysis Wang, Yaxuan Chang, Xueliang Li, Jingdong Han, Zhenwei Int Braz J Urol Review Article PURPOSE: Various surgical options are available for large proximal ureteral stones, such as extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URSL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (LU). However, the best option remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted a network meta-analysis comparing various surgical treatments for proximal ureteral stones ≥10mm to address current research deficiencies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched PubMed, Ovid, Scopus (up to June 2019), as well as citation lists to identify eligible comparative studies. All clinical studies including patients comparing surgical treatments for proximal ureteral stones ≥10mm were included. A standard network meta-analysis was performed with Stata SE 14 (Stata Corp, College Station, TX, USA) software to generate comparative statistics. The quality was assessed with level of evidence according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine and risk of bias with the Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manager (RevMan) 5.3 software. RESULTS: A total of 25 studies including 2.888 patients were included in this network meta-analysis. Network meta-analyses indicated that LU and PCNL had better stone-free rates and auxiliary procedures. PCNL could result in major complications and severe bleeding. In initial stone-free rate, final stone-free rate, and auxiliary procedures results, SUCRA ranking was: LU> PCNL> URSL> ESWL. In Clavien Dindo score ≥3 complications, SUCRA ranking was: LU> ESWL> URSL> PCNL. In fever, SUCRA ranking was: ESWL> LU> URSL> PCNL. In transfusion, SUCRA ranking was: LU> URSL> ESWL> PCNL. In Cluster analysis, LU had the highest advantages and acceptable side effects. Considering the traumatic nature of PCNL, it should not be an option over URSL. ESWL had the lowest advantages. CONCLUSIONS: LU have the potential to be considered as the first treatment choice of proximal ureteral stone ≥10mm. Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia 2020-09-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7527111/ /pubmed/32459455 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2019.0550 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Review Article Wang, Yaxuan Chang, Xueliang Li, Jingdong Han, Zhenwei Efficacy and safety of various surgical treatments for proximal ureteral stone ≥10mm: A systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title | Efficacy and safety of various surgical treatments for proximal ureteral stone ≥10mm: A systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_full | Efficacy and safety of various surgical treatments for proximal ureteral stone ≥10mm: A systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Efficacy and safety of various surgical treatments for proximal ureteral stone ≥10mm: A systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy and safety of various surgical treatments for proximal ureteral stone ≥10mm: A systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_short | Efficacy and safety of various surgical treatments for proximal ureteral stone ≥10mm: A systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_sort | efficacy and safety of various surgical treatments for proximal ureteral stone ≥10mm: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
topic | Review Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7527111/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32459455 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2019.0550 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wangyaxuan efficacyandsafetyofvarioussurgicaltreatmentsforproximalureteralstone10mmasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT changxueliang efficacyandsafetyofvarioussurgicaltreatmentsforproximalureteralstone10mmasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT lijingdong efficacyandsafetyofvarioussurgicaltreatmentsforproximalureteralstone10mmasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT hanzhenwei efficacyandsafetyofvarioussurgicaltreatmentsforproximalureteralstone10mmasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis |