经皮肾镜与柔性输尿管镜治疗肾盏憩室结石:荟萃分析。

IF 1.7 3区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY BMC Urology Pub Date : 2025-01-02 DOI:10.1186/s12894-024-01655-w
Conglei Hu, Rui Ma, Yongxiang Shao, Zilong Liang, Meng Cheng, Haofeng Pang, Liping Yao, Fei Liu
{"title":"经皮肾镜与柔性输尿管镜治疗肾盏憩室结石:荟萃分析。","authors":"Conglei Hu, Rui Ma, Yongxiang Shao, Zilong Liang, Meng Cheng, Haofeng Pang, Liping Yao, Fei Liu","doi":"10.1186/s12894-024-01655-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is still controversy about the best minimally invasive surgical method for the treatment of calyceal diverticulum calculi. We conducted meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of PCNL and FURL in the treatment of calyceal diverticulum calculi.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, Clinical trial platform, CNKI, VIP until April 2024. We utilized the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS, 0 to 9 stars) to assess the quality of the included literature.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Totally 15 high-quality studies with 755 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed that FURL group was better than PCNL group in blood loss [SMD = 1.713, 95%CI:(0.858, 2.568), Z = 3.928, P = 0.000] and hospital stay [SMD = 2.611, 95%CI: (1.726, 3.496), Z = 5.784, P = 0.000], there was no significant difference in operating time [SMD = 0.079, 95%CI:(-0.43, 0.589), Z = 0.306, P = 0.760], complication rate [OR = 1.793,95%CI: (0.952,2.602), Z = 1.586, P = 0.113], stone-free rate [OR = 1.339, 95%CI: (0.576, 3.112), Z = 0.678, P = 0.497] and symptom-free rate [OR = 3.826,95%CI: (0.561,10.238), Z = 0.966, P = 0.334] as well.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Whether FURL is indeed superior to PCNL in safety, whether FURL's efficacy is really close to PCNL, and whether FURL can surpass PCNL as the first choice for the treatment of renal diverticulum stones in the future need to be further verified by multi-center, large-sample and high-quality studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":9285,"journal":{"name":"BMC Urology","volume":"25 1","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11694468/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Percutaneous nephroscopy versus flexible ureteroscopy in the treatment of calyceal diverticulum calculi: a meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Conglei Hu, Rui Ma, Yongxiang Shao, Zilong Liang, Meng Cheng, Haofeng Pang, Liping Yao, Fei Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12894-024-01655-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is still controversy about the best minimally invasive surgical method for the treatment of calyceal diverticulum calculi. We conducted meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of PCNL and FURL in the treatment of calyceal diverticulum calculi.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, Clinical trial platform, CNKI, VIP until April 2024. We utilized the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS, 0 to 9 stars) to assess the quality of the included literature.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Totally 15 high-quality studies with 755 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed that FURL group was better than PCNL group in blood loss [SMD = 1.713, 95%CI:(0.858, 2.568), Z = 3.928, P = 0.000] and hospital stay [SMD = 2.611, 95%CI: (1.726, 3.496), Z = 5.784, P = 0.000], there was no significant difference in operating time [SMD = 0.079, 95%CI:(-0.43, 0.589), Z = 0.306, P = 0.760], complication rate [OR = 1.793,95%CI: (0.952,2.602), Z = 1.586, P = 0.113], stone-free rate [OR = 1.339, 95%CI: (0.576, 3.112), Z = 0.678, P = 0.497] and symptom-free rate [OR = 3.826,95%CI: (0.561,10.238), Z = 0.966, P = 0.334] as well.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Whether FURL is indeed superior to PCNL in safety, whether FURL's efficacy is really close to PCNL, and whether FURL can surpass PCNL as the first choice for the treatment of renal diverticulum stones in the future need to be further verified by multi-center, large-sample and high-quality studies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9285,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Urology\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"1\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11694468/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-024-01655-w\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-024-01655-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:关于治疗肾盏憩室结石的最佳微创手术方法仍存在争议。我们对 PCNL 和 FURL 治疗肾盏憩室结石的有效性和安全性进行了荟萃分析:我们检索了 Pubmed、Cochrane Library、Web of Science、Embase、临床试验平台、CNKI、VIP,直至 2024 年 4 月。我们采用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表(Newcastle-Ottawa Scale,0 到 9 星级)来评估纳入文献的质量:结果:荟萃分析共纳入 15 项高质量研究,755 名患者。荟萃分析显示,FURL组在失血量[SMD = 1.713,95%CI:(0.858, 2.568),Z = 3.928,P = 0.000]和住院时间[SMD = 2.611,95%CI:(1.726, 3.496),Z = 5.784,P = 0.000]方面优于PCNL组,在手术时间[SMD = 0.079,95%CI:(-0.43, 0.589), Z = 0.306, P = 0.760]、并发症发生率[OR = 1.793,95%CI: (0.952,2.602), Z = 1.586, P = 0.113]、无结石率[OR = 1.339, 95%CI: (0.576, 3.112), Z = 0.678, P = 0.497]以及无症状率[OR = 3.826,95%CI: (0.561,10.238), Z = 0.966, P = 0.334]:结论:FURL的安全性是否真的优于PCNL,FURL的疗效是否真的接近PCNL,FURL是否能超越PCNL成为未来治疗肾憩室结石的首选,这些都需要多中心、大样本、高质量的研究来进一步验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Percutaneous nephroscopy versus flexible ureteroscopy in the treatment of calyceal diverticulum calculi: a meta-analysis.

Background: There is still controversy about the best minimally invasive surgical method for the treatment of calyceal diverticulum calculi. We conducted meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of PCNL and FURL in the treatment of calyceal diverticulum calculi.

Methods: We searched Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, Clinical trial platform, CNKI, VIP until April 2024. We utilized the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS, 0 to 9 stars) to assess the quality of the included literature.

Results: Totally 15 high-quality studies with 755 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed that FURL group was better than PCNL group in blood loss [SMD = 1.713, 95%CI:(0.858, 2.568), Z = 3.928, P = 0.000] and hospital stay [SMD = 2.611, 95%CI: (1.726, 3.496), Z = 5.784, P = 0.000], there was no significant difference in operating time [SMD = 0.079, 95%CI:(-0.43, 0.589), Z = 0.306, P = 0.760], complication rate [OR = 1.793,95%CI: (0.952,2.602), Z = 1.586, P = 0.113], stone-free rate [OR = 1.339, 95%CI: (0.576, 3.112), Z = 0.678, P = 0.497] and symptom-free rate [OR = 3.826,95%CI: (0.561,10.238), Z = 0.966, P = 0.334] as well.

Conclusion: Whether FURL is indeed superior to PCNL in safety, whether FURL's efficacy is really close to PCNL, and whether FURL can surpass PCNL as the first choice for the treatment of renal diverticulum stones in the future need to be further verified by multi-center, large-sample and high-quality studies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Urology
BMC Urology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
177
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Urology is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of urological disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology. The journal considers manuscripts in the following broad subject-specific sections of urology: Endourology and technology Epidemiology and health outcomes Pediatric urology Pre-clinical and basic research Reconstructive urology Sexual function and fertility Urological imaging Urological oncology Voiding dysfunction Case reports.
期刊最新文献
Chordee and hooded prepuce with no hypospadias; outcome of urethral preservation surgery with spongioplasty. Monitoring of prostate-specific antigen in men with benign prostate enlargement receiving 5-alpha reductase inhibitors: a non-interventional, cross-sectional study of real-world practice of urologists in Spain and Brazil. Risk factors for renal insufficiency and survival implications after radical nephrectomy and thrombectomy in renal cell carcinoma with tumor thrombus: a systematic review. Use of erectile dysfunction treatments after prostate cancer treatment and their perceived impact on men's sex life: an analysis of patient reported outcome survey data. Comparison of treatments for preventing lower urinary tract symptoms after BCG immunotherapy of bladder tumors : a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1