Slider

Wang Y. et al., 2020: Efficacy and safety of various surgical treatments for proximal ureteral stone ≥10mm: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Wang Y, Chang X, Li J, Han Z.
Department of Urology, The Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.

Abstract

Purpose: Various surgical options are available for large proximal ureteral stones, such as extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URSL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (LU). However, the best option remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted a network meta-analysis comparing various surgical treatments for proximal ureteral stones ≥10mm to address current research deficiencies.

Materials and methods: We searched PubMed, Ovid, Scopus (up to June 2019), as well as citation lists to identify eligible comparative studies. All clinical studies including patients comparing surgical treatments for proximal ureteral stones ≥10mm were included. A standard network meta-analysis was performed with Stata SE 14 (Stata Corp, College Station, TX, USA) software to generate comparative statistics. The quality was assessed with level of evidence according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine and risk of bias with the Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager (RevMan) 5.3 software.

Results: A total of 25 studies including 2.888 patients were included in this network meta-analysis. Network meta-analyses indicated that LU and PCNL had better stone-free rates and auxiliary procedures. PCNL could result in major complications and severe bleeding. In initial stone-free rate, final stone-free rate, and auxiliary procedures results, SUCRA ranking was: LU> PCNL> URSL> ESWL. In Clavien Dindo score ≥3 complications, SUCRA ranking was: LU> ESWL> URSL> PCNL. In fever, SUCRA ranking was: ESWL> LU> URSL> PCNL. In transfusion, SUCRA ranking was: LU> URSL> ESWL> PCNL. In Cluster analysis, LU had the highest advantages and acceptable side effects. Considering the traumatic nature of PCNL, it should not be an option over URSL. ESWL had the lowest advantages.

Conclusions: LU have the potential to be considered as the first treatment choice of proximal ureteral stone ≥10mm.

Int Braz J Urol. 2020 May 18;46. doi: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2019.0550. PMID: 32459455. FREE ARTICLE

0
 

Comments 1

Peter Alken on Friday, September 18 2020 08:35

I am looking for the surprise meta-analysis to come which will show that I was wrong in my internal summery of what I have read and in my gut feelings. The conclusion of this review is what everybody expected. It has, of course, to be shown. The authors use seven different techniques to present the data. Who wants to dig deeper into the graphical presentation of meta-analyses should have a look at: Chaimani A, Higgins JP, Mavridis D, Spyridonos P, Salanti G. Graphical tools for network meta-analysis in STATA. PLoS One. 2013;8(10):e76654. Published 2013 Oct 3. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0076654. FREE ARTICLE

I am looking for the surprise meta-analysis to come which will show that I was wrong in my internal summery of what I have read and in my gut feelings. The conclusion of this review is what everybody expected. It has, of course, to be shown. The authors use seven different techniques to present the data. Who wants to dig deeper into the graphical presentation of meta-analyses should have a look at: Chaimani A, Higgins JP, Mavridis D, Spyridonos P, Salanti G. Graphical tools for network meta-analysis in STATA. PLoS One. 2013;8(10):e76654. Published 2013 Oct 3. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0076654. FREE ARTICLE
Guest
Tuesday, October 20 2020

By accepting you will be accessing a service provided by a third-party external to https://www.storzmedical.com/

Linkedin Channel Facebook Channel Instagram Channel Pinterest Channel Youtube Channel