Beatriz T Constantinou, Bianca C Benedicto, Breno C Porto, Mikhael Belkovsky, Carlo C Passerotti, Everson L Artifon, Jose P Otoch, Jose A da Cruz
{"title":"PCNL vs. two staged RIRS for kidney stones greater than 20 mm: systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis.","authors":"Beatriz T Constantinou, Bianca C Benedicto, Breno C Porto, Mikhael Belkovsky, Carlo C Passerotti, Everson L Artifon, Jose P Otoch, Jose A da Cruz","doi":"10.23736/S2724-6051.23.05577-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is considered the gold standard treatment for kidney stones greater than 20 mm. However, retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) may achieve the same stone-free rate with repeated procedures, and potentially fewer complications. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of PCNL and two-staged RIRS.</p><p><strong>Evidence acquisition: </strong>We conducted a systematic search in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science for studies comparing PCNL and RIRS for kidney stones greater than 20mm. The primary outcome is stone-free rate (SFR) of PCNL and RIRS (repeated once if needed). Secondary outcomes were SFR of PCNL versus RIRS (single procedure), operative time, hospital stay, need for auxiliary procedures, and complications. We performed a subgroup analysis for randomized trials, non-randomized trials, and patients with solitary kidney. We performed a trial sequential analysis for the main outcome.</p><p><strong>Evidence synthesis: </strong>We included 31 articles, with 1987 patients in the PCNL and 1724 patients in RIRS. We confirmed the traditional result that after a single procedure PCNL has a higher SFR. We also found that comparing the SFR of PCNL and RIRS, repeated up to two times if needed, no difference in SFR was observed. Surprisingly, only 26% (CI95 23%-28%) of the patients required a second RIRS. In the trial sequential analysis, the last point of the z-curve was within futility borders. We observed that PCNL has a higher incidence of complications (RR=1.51; CI95 1.24, 1.83; P<0.0001; I<sup>2</sup>=28%), specifically CD2 (RR=1.82; CI95 1.30, 2.54; P=0.0004; I<sup>2</sup>=26%) and longer hospital stay (MD 2.57; 2.18, 2.96; P<0.00001; I<sup>2</sup>-98%). No difference was observed regarding operative time.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RIRS repeated up to two times is equivalent to PCNL in terms of the SFR and may have the same safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":53228,"journal":{"name":"Minerva Urology and Nephrology","volume":"76 1","pages":"31-41"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva Urology and Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6051.23.05577-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is considered the gold standard treatment for kidney stones greater than 20 mm. However, retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) may achieve the same stone-free rate with repeated procedures, and potentially fewer complications. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of PCNL and two-staged RIRS.
Evidence acquisition: We conducted a systematic search in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science for studies comparing PCNL and RIRS for kidney stones greater than 20mm. The primary outcome is stone-free rate (SFR) of PCNL and RIRS (repeated once if needed). Secondary outcomes were SFR of PCNL versus RIRS (single procedure), operative time, hospital stay, need for auxiliary procedures, and complications. We performed a subgroup analysis for randomized trials, non-randomized trials, and patients with solitary kidney. We performed a trial sequential analysis for the main outcome.
Evidence synthesis: We included 31 articles, with 1987 patients in the PCNL and 1724 patients in RIRS. We confirmed the traditional result that after a single procedure PCNL has a higher SFR. We also found that comparing the SFR of PCNL and RIRS, repeated up to two times if needed, no difference in SFR was observed. Surprisingly, only 26% (CI95 23%-28%) of the patients required a second RIRS. In the trial sequential analysis, the last point of the z-curve was within futility borders. We observed that PCNL has a higher incidence of complications (RR=1.51; CI95 1.24, 1.83; P<0.0001; I2=28%), specifically CD2 (RR=1.82; CI95 1.30, 2.54; P=0.0004; I2=26%) and longer hospital stay (MD 2.57; 2.18, 2.96; P<0.00001; I2-98%). No difference was observed regarding operative time.
Conclusions: RIRS repeated up to two times is equivalent to PCNL in terms of the SFR and may have the same safety.