Cargando…
Comparison of single-use and reusable flexible ureteroscope for renal stone management: a pooled analysis of 772 patients
Flexible ureteroscopy is a common therapy for patients with renal calculi. In recent years, the prevalence of single-use flexible ureteroscope (FURS) use has been on the rise. Thus, several trials have been conducted to compare the efficacy between single-use and reusable FURS. The aim of this meta-...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
AME Publishing Company
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7844498/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33532336 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau-20-1009 |
_version_ | 1783644357832736768 |
---|---|
author | Li, Yongchao Chen, Jinbo Zhu, Zewu Zeng, Huimin Zeng, Feng Chen, Zhiyong Yang, Zhongqing Cui, Yu Chen, Hequn Li, Yang |
author_facet | Li, Yongchao Chen, Jinbo Zhu, Zewu Zeng, Huimin Zeng, Feng Chen, Zhiyong Yang, Zhongqing Cui, Yu Chen, Hequn Li, Yang |
author_sort | Li, Yongchao |
collection | PubMed |
description | Flexible ureteroscopy is a common therapy for patients with renal calculi. In recent years, the prevalence of single-use flexible ureteroscope (FURS) use has been on the rise. Thus, several trials have been conducted to compare the efficacy between single-use and reusable FURS. The aim of this meta-analysis was to systematically assess the effectiveness and safety of single-use vs. reusable FURS in treating renal stones. PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and EMBASE were researched to identify relevant studies up to September 2019. Article selection was performed through the search strategy based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was applied to assess the methodological quality of non-randomized controlled trials, and the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials was evaluated using the Jadad scale. A total of five studies with 772 patients were included in the meta-analysis, including two randomized controlled trials, two single-centre prospective studies, and one prospective case-control trial. The pooled results showed that single-use FURS was associated with a higher stone-free rate (SFR) (OR: 1.50; 95% CI, 1.06–2.12; P=0.02) than reusable FURS. A significant difference was noted in operative time, and single-use FURS was associated with a longer operative duration (MD: 7.39 min; 95% CI, 1.75–13.03; P=0.01). No significant difference was noted in perioperative complications (OR: 0.97; 95% CI, 0.56–1.70; P=0.92). Subgroup analysis showed no significant difference in urinary tract infection (OR: 0.80; 95% CI, 0.44–1.46; P=0.46), stent migration (OR: 0.56; 95% CI, 0.19–1.65; P=0.30) or acute kidney injury (OR: 0.76; 95% CI, 0.16–3.57; P=0.73). Single-use FURS is an effective and safe alternative to reusable FURS for the management of renal stones. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7844498 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | AME Publishing Company |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78444982021-02-01 Comparison of single-use and reusable flexible ureteroscope for renal stone management: a pooled analysis of 772 patients Li, Yongchao Chen, Jinbo Zhu, Zewu Zeng, Huimin Zeng, Feng Chen, Zhiyong Yang, Zhongqing Cui, Yu Chen, Hequn Li, Yang Transl Androl Urol Review Article Flexible ureteroscopy is a common therapy for patients with renal calculi. In recent years, the prevalence of single-use flexible ureteroscope (FURS) use has been on the rise. Thus, several trials have been conducted to compare the efficacy between single-use and reusable FURS. The aim of this meta-analysis was to systematically assess the effectiveness and safety of single-use vs. reusable FURS in treating renal stones. PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and EMBASE were researched to identify relevant studies up to September 2019. Article selection was performed through the search strategy based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was applied to assess the methodological quality of non-randomized controlled trials, and the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials was evaluated using the Jadad scale. A total of five studies with 772 patients were included in the meta-analysis, including two randomized controlled trials, two single-centre prospective studies, and one prospective case-control trial. The pooled results showed that single-use FURS was associated with a higher stone-free rate (SFR) (OR: 1.50; 95% CI, 1.06–2.12; P=0.02) than reusable FURS. A significant difference was noted in operative time, and single-use FURS was associated with a longer operative duration (MD: 7.39 min; 95% CI, 1.75–13.03; P=0.01). No significant difference was noted in perioperative complications (OR: 0.97; 95% CI, 0.56–1.70; P=0.92). Subgroup analysis showed no significant difference in urinary tract infection (OR: 0.80; 95% CI, 0.44–1.46; P=0.46), stent migration (OR: 0.56; 95% CI, 0.19–1.65; P=0.30) or acute kidney injury (OR: 0.76; 95% CI, 0.16–3.57; P=0.73). Single-use FURS is an effective and safe alternative to reusable FURS for the management of renal stones. AME Publishing Company 2021-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7844498/ /pubmed/33532336 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau-20-1009 Text en 2021 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 | Review Article Li, Yongchao Chen, Jinbo Zhu, Zewu Zeng, Huimin Zeng, Feng Chen, Zhiyong Yang, Zhongqing Cui, Yu Chen, Hequn Li, Yang Comparison of single-use and reusable flexible ureteroscope for renal stone management: a pooled analysis of 772 patients |
title | Comparison of single-use and reusable flexible ureteroscope for renal stone management: a pooled analysis of 772 patients |
title_full | Comparison of single-use and reusable flexible ureteroscope for renal stone management: a pooled analysis of 772 patients |
title_fullStr | Comparison of single-use and reusable flexible ureteroscope for renal stone management: a pooled analysis of 772 patients |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of single-use and reusable flexible ureteroscope for renal stone management: a pooled analysis of 772 patients |
title_short | Comparison of single-use and reusable flexible ureteroscope for renal stone management: a pooled analysis of 772 patients |
title_sort | comparison of single-use and reusable flexible ureteroscope for renal stone management: a pooled analysis of 772 patients |
topic | Review Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7844498/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33532336 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau-20-1009 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT liyongchao comparisonofsingleuseandreusableflexibleureteroscopeforrenalstonemanagementapooledanalysisof772patients AT chenjinbo comparisonofsingleuseandreusableflexibleureteroscopeforrenalstonemanagementapooledanalysisof772patients AT zhuzewu comparisonofsingleuseandreusableflexibleureteroscopeforrenalstonemanagementapooledanalysisof772patients AT zenghuimin comparisonofsingleuseandreusableflexibleureteroscopeforrenalstonemanagementapooledanalysisof772patients AT zengfeng comparisonofsingleuseandreusableflexibleureteroscopeforrenalstonemanagementapooledanalysisof772patients AT chenzhiyong comparisonofsingleuseandreusableflexibleureteroscopeforrenalstonemanagementapooledanalysisof772patients AT yangzhongqing comparisonofsingleuseandreusableflexibleureteroscopeforrenalstonemanagementapooledanalysisof772patients AT cuiyu comparisonofsingleuseandreusableflexibleureteroscopeforrenalstonemanagementapooledanalysisof772patients AT chenhequn comparisonofsingleuseandreusableflexibleureteroscopeforrenalstonemanagementapooledanalysisof772patients AT liyang comparisonofsingleuseandreusableflexibleureteroscopeforrenalstonemanagementapooledanalysisof772patients |