{"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。
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.
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.