{"title":"腹腔内睾丸切除术中 Shehata 技术与 Fowler-Stephens 睪丸固定术的比较：一项荟萃分析","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jpurol.2024.07.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div><span>The management of intra-abdominal testis (IAT) represents a significant clinical challenge, necessitating the transposition of the testis from the </span>abdominal cavity<span> to the scrotum. This procedure is rendered complex by the abbreviated length of the testicular vessels.</span></div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Our purpose in this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing Shehata technique (ST) versus Fowler Stephens technique (FST) in treating patients with IAT.</div></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><div>We conducted a comprehensive literature search using several databases, including Ovid Medline, Cochrane, PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Sciences, EMBASE, and SCOPUS until February 2024. This study included research that compared ST and FST for managing intra-abdominal testis. We evaluated the rates of atrophy and retraction, as well as the overall success rates, for both techniques.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div><span>Six studies were identified as appropriate for meta-analysis, comparing orchidopexy performed using the ST with 169 patients, against the FST involving 162 patients. The comparison showed no statistically significant age difference at the time of surgery between the groups (I</span><sup>2</sup> = 0%) (WMD 0.05, 95% CI − 1.24 to 1.34; p = 0.94). Operative time in first the stage was lower in the FST group than ST group (I<sup>2</sup> = 95%) (WMD 10.90, 95% CI 1.94 to 19.87; p = 0.02). Operative time in the second stage was lower in the ST group than FST group (I<sup>2</sup> = 83%) (WMD - 6.15, 95% CI - 12.21 to −0.10; p = 0.05). Our analysis showed that ST had a similar atrophy rate (I<sup>2</sup> = 0%) (OR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.20 to 1.01; p = 0.05). No difference was found between techniques in terms of retraction rate (I<sup>2</sup> = 0%) (OR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.17 to 2.47; p = 0.52). The ST demonstrated a notably higher overall success rate compared to FST (I<sup>2</sup> = 1%) (RR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.27; p = 0.009). Overall success rate in ST and FST were 87% and 74%, respectively. Overall atrophy rate in ST and FST were 5% and 12%, respectively. Overall retraction rate in ST and FST were 5% and 10%, respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>The ST, renowned for its pioneering two-stage laparoscopic approach that leverages mechanical traction to lengthen the testicular vessels, is gaining popularity due to its recognized safety and efficacy. Conversely, the Fowler-Stephens technique, a traditional method that relies on collateral blood supply<span> for testicular mobilization, has come under examination for its potential link to an increased risk of testicular atrophy.</span></div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div><span>This meta-analysis reveals that the Shehata technique has similar or better outcomes compared to the Fowler-Stephens technique in IAT management. Further prospective multicentric randomized controlled trials are warranted.</span><span><div><span><span><p><span>Summary Table</span>. <!-->Summary of findings.</p></span></span><div><table><thead><tr><th>Study (Author et al.)</th><th>Testis (n)</th><th>ST/FST</th></tr><tr><td><span>Empty Cell</span></td><th>ST</th><th>FST</th><th>Total</th><th>Atrophy (n)</th><th>Retraction (n)</th><th>Overall success (n)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th>Liu et al. [<span><span>14</span></span>]</th><td>22</td><td>23</td><td>45</td><td>0/1</td><td>0/4</td><td>22/18</td></tr><tr><th>Dawood et al. [<span><span>15</span></span>]</th><td>20</td><td>21</td><td>41</td><td>0/3</td><td>1/1</td><td>14/13</td></tr><tr><th>Bawazir et al. [<span><span>16</span></span>]</th><td>11</td><td>18</td><td>29</td><td>0/3</td><td>2/2</td><td>9/8</td></tr><tr><th>Alekrashy et al. [<span><span>17</span></span>]</th><td>20</td><td>18</td><td>38</td><td>0/2</td><td>NR</td><td>18/15</td></tr><tr><th>Bidault-Jourdainne et al. [<span><span>18</span></span>]</th><td>80</td><td>67</td><td>147</td><td>8/9</td><td>NR</td><td>68/54</td></tr><tr><th>An Ye et al. [<span><span>19</span></span>]</th><td>16</td><td>15</td><td>31</td><td>0/2</td><td>0/1</td><td>16/12</td></tr></tbody></table></div></div></span></div></div>","PeriodicalId":16747,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pediatric Urology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Shehata technique versus Fowler-Stephens orchidopexy in intra-abdominal testis: A meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jpurol.2024.07.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div><span>The management of intra-abdominal testis (IAT) represents a significant clinical challenge, necessitating the transposition of the testis from the </span>abdominal cavity<span> to the scrotum. This procedure is rendered complex by the abbreviated length of the testicular vessels.</span></div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Our purpose in this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing Shehata technique (ST) versus Fowler Stephens technique (FST) in treating patients with IAT.</div></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><div>We conducted a comprehensive literature search using several databases, including Ovid Medline, Cochrane, PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Sciences, EMBASE, and SCOPUS until February 2024. This study included research that compared ST and FST for managing intra-abdominal testis. We evaluated the rates of atrophy and retraction, as well as the overall success rates, for both techniques.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div><span>Six studies were identified as appropriate for meta-analysis, comparing orchidopexy performed using the ST with 169 patients, against the FST involving 162 patients. The comparison showed no statistically significant age difference at the time of surgery between the groups (I</span><sup>2</sup> = 0%) (WMD 0.05, 95% CI − 1.24 to 1.34; p = 0.94). Operative time in first the stage was lower in the FST group than ST group (I<sup>2</sup> = 95%) (WMD 10.90, 95% CI 1.94 to 19.87; p = 0.02). Operative time in the second stage was lower in the ST group than FST group (I<sup>2</sup> = 83%) (WMD - 6.15, 95% CI - 12.21 to −0.10; p = 0.05). Our analysis showed that ST had a similar atrophy rate (I<sup>2</sup> = 0%) (OR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.20 to 1.01; p = 0.05). No difference was found between techniques in terms of retraction rate (I<sup>2</sup> = 0%) (OR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.17 to 2.47; p = 0.52). The ST demonstrated a notably higher overall success rate compared to FST (I<sup>2</sup> = 1%) (RR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.27; p = 0.009). Overall success rate in ST and FST were 87% and 74%, respectively. Overall atrophy rate in ST and FST were 5% and 12%, respectively. Overall retraction rate in ST and FST were 5% and 10%, respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>The ST, renowned for its pioneering two-stage laparoscopic approach that leverages mechanical traction to lengthen the testicular vessels, is gaining popularity due to its recognized safety and efficacy. Conversely, the Fowler-Stephens technique, a traditional method that relies on collateral blood supply<span> for testicular mobilization, has come under examination for its potential link to an increased risk of testicular atrophy.</span></div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div><span>This meta-analysis reveals that the Shehata technique has similar or better outcomes compared to the Fowler-Stephens technique in IAT management. Further prospective multicentric randomized controlled trials are warranted.</span><span><div><span><span><p><span>Summary Table</span>. <!-->Summary of findings.</p></span></span><div><table><thead><tr><th>Study (Author et al.)</th><th>Testis (n)</th><th>ST/FST</th></tr><tr><td><span>Empty Cell</span></td><th>ST</th><th>FST</th><th>Total</th><th>Atrophy (n)</th><th>Retraction (n)</th><th>Overall success (n)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th>Liu et al. [<span><span>14</span></span>]</th><td>22</td><td>23</td><td>45</td><td>0/1</td><td>0/4</td><td>22/18</td></tr><tr><th>Dawood et al. [<span><span>15</span></span>]</th><td>20</td><td>21</td><td>41</td><td>0/3</td><td>1/1</td><td>14/13</td></tr><tr><th>Bawazir et al. [<span><span>16</span></span>]</th><td>11</td><td>18</td><td>29</td><td>0/3</td><td>2/2</td><td>9/8</td></tr><tr><th>Alekrashy et al. [<span><span>17</span></span>]</th><td>20</td><td>18</td><td>38</td><td>0/2</td><td>NR</td><td>18/15</td></tr><tr><th>Bidault-Jourdainne et al. [<span><span>18</span></span>]</th><td>80</td><td>67</td><td>147</td><td>8/9</td><td>NR</td><td>68/54</td></tr><tr><th>An Ye et al. [<span><span>19</span></span>]</th><td>16</td><td>15</td><td>31</td><td>0/2</td><td>0/1</td><td>16/12</td></tr></tbody></table></div></div></span></div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16747,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pediatric Urology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pediatric Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1477513124003589\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pediatric Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1477513124003589","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Shehata technique versus Fowler-Stephens orchidopexy in intra-abdominal testis: A meta-analysis
Introduction
The management of intra-abdominal testis (IAT) represents a significant clinical challenge, necessitating the transposition of the testis from the abdominal cavity to the scrotum. This procedure is rendered complex by the abbreviated length of the testicular vessels.
Objective
Our purpose in this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing Shehata technique (ST) versus Fowler Stephens technique (FST) in treating patients with IAT.
Study design
We conducted a comprehensive literature search using several databases, including Ovid Medline, Cochrane, PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Sciences, EMBASE, and SCOPUS until February 2024. This study included research that compared ST and FST for managing intra-abdominal testis. We evaluated the rates of atrophy and retraction, as well as the overall success rates, for both techniques.
Results
Six studies were identified as appropriate for meta-analysis, comparing orchidopexy performed using the ST with 169 patients, against the FST involving 162 patients. The comparison showed no statistically significant age difference at the time of surgery between the groups (I2 = 0%) (WMD 0.05, 95% CI − 1.24 to 1.34; p = 0.94). Operative time in first the stage was lower in the FST group than ST group (I2 = 95%) (WMD 10.90, 95% CI 1.94 to 19.87; p = 0.02). Operative time in the second stage was lower in the ST group than FST group (I2 = 83%) (WMD - 6.15, 95% CI - 12.21 to −0.10; p = 0.05). Our analysis showed that ST had a similar atrophy rate (I2 = 0%) (OR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.20 to 1.01; p = 0.05). No difference was found between techniques in terms of retraction rate (I2 = 0%) (OR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.17 to 2.47; p = 0.52). The ST demonstrated a notably higher overall success rate compared to FST (I2 = 1%) (RR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.27; p = 0.009). Overall success rate in ST and FST were 87% and 74%, respectively. Overall atrophy rate in ST and FST were 5% and 12%, respectively. Overall retraction rate in ST and FST were 5% and 10%, respectively.
Discussion
The ST, renowned for its pioneering two-stage laparoscopic approach that leverages mechanical traction to lengthen the testicular vessels, is gaining popularity due to its recognized safety and efficacy. Conversely, the Fowler-Stephens technique, a traditional method that relies on collateral blood supply for testicular mobilization, has come under examination for its potential link to an increased risk of testicular atrophy.
Conclusion
This meta-analysis reveals that the Shehata technique has similar or better outcomes compared to the Fowler-Stephens technique in IAT management. Further prospective multicentric randomized controlled trials are warranted.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Pediatric Urology publishes submitted research and clinical articles relating to Pediatric Urology which have been accepted after adequate peer review.
It publishes regular articles that have been submitted after invitation, that cover the curriculum of Pediatric Urology, and enable trainee surgeons to attain theoretical competence of the sub-specialty.
It publishes regular reviews of pediatric urological articles appearing in other journals.
It publishes invited review articles by recognised experts on modern or controversial aspects of the sub-specialty.
It enables any affiliated society to advertise society events or information in the journal without charge and will publish abstracts of papers to be read at society meetings.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
