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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Yaxuan, Chang, Xueliang, Li, Jingdong, Han, Zhenwei
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