Micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery in the treatment of renal stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
meta_analysis · Level I
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 30339676.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0206048 and PMC identifier 6195289.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
To compare the efficacy and safety of micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy (Microperc) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in treating renal stones using published literature. A systematic literature review was performed on August 21, 2017, using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Summarized mean differences (MDs) or odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to assess the differences in outcomes between Microperc and RIRS. A total of nine studies (7 in adult patients and 2 in pediatric patients) containing 842 patients (381 Microperc cases and 461 RIRS cases) with renal stones were included in this analysis. Among the adult patients, Microperc was associated with higher stone-free rate(SFR)(OR: 1.6; 95% CI, 1.03 to 2.48), significantly longer hospital stays (MD: 0.66 day; 95% CI, 0.17 to 1.15), longer fluoroscopy time (MD: 78.12 s; 95% CI, 66.08 to 90.15), and larger decreases in hemoglobin (MD: 0.59 g/dl; 95% CI, 0.16 to 1.02) than was RIRS. No significant differences were observed with respect to operative time, stone-free rate, complication rate or auxiliary procedures. Our results demonstrated that Microperc might be more effective in adult patients than RIRS will due to its higher SFR. However, longer hospital stays, longer fluoroscopy time and a larger decrease in hemoglobin should be considered cautiously.
Medical subject headings
- Kidney
- Kidney Calculi
- Nephrostomy, Percutaneous