Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
Urology. 2011 Jun;77(6):1293-8. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2010.10.023. Epub 2011 Jan 22.
To assess the efficacy and safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) compared with standard or small-bore PCNL with a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.
All eligible studies were searched on MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases. Risk ratio (RR), mean difference, or standardized mean difference (SMD), with its 95% CI, was used to evaluate the size effect.
Ten and 3 trials were identified for comparison I (tubeless PCNL vs standard PCNL, 320 cases and 323 controls) and comparison II (tubeless PCNL vs small-bore PCNL, 55 cases and 54 controls), respectively. Tubeless PCNL required significantly less analgesia relative to standard PCNL (SMD -1.72; 95% CI -2.30 to 1.13; P(heterogeneity) = 0.04) and small-pore PCNL (SMD -0.69; 95% CI -1.13 to 2.05; P(heterogeneity) = 0.94). Furthermore, there was a remarkably shorter hospital stay in comparison I (SMD -1.35; 95% CI -1.40 to 1.30; P(heterogeneity) = 0.60) and comparison II (SMD -0.49; 95% CI -0.76 to 0.21; P(heterogeneity) = 0.15). The return to normal activity days was also significantly decreased in comparison I (SMD -4.34; 95% CI -6.28 to 2.41; P(heterogeneity) = 0.02). However, no significant difference was observed in the analyses concerning stone-free blood transfusion and complications rate in both comparisons. In subgroup analyses by nephrostomy diameter (22-Fr) and drainage methods, most results were consistent with the overall findings except for that to evaluate the operative time in the double-J stent subgroup.
Tubeless PCNL is associated with less pain and quicker recovery compared with standard or small-bore PCNL, in the management of uncomplicated renal calculi.
通过荟萃分析随机对照试验,评估无管经皮肾镜取石术(PCNL)与标准或小口径 PCNL 的疗效和安全性。
在 MEDLINE、Embase 和 Cochrane 图书馆数据库中搜索所有合格的研究。使用风险比(RR)、均数差或标准化均数差(SMD)及其 95%置信区间来评估效应大小。
分别为比较 I(无管 PCNL 与标准 PCNL,320 例和 323 例对照)和比较 II(无管 PCNL 与小口径 PCNL,55 例和 54 例对照)确定了 10 项和 3 项试验。与标准 PCNL 相比,无管 PCNL 所需的镇痛明显减少(SMD-1.72;95%CI-2.30 至 1.13;P(异质性)=0.04)和小口径 PCNL(SMD-0.69;95%CI-1.13 至 2.05;P(异质性)=0.94)。此外,在比较 I(SMD-1.35;95%CI-1.40 至 1.30;P(异质性)=0.60)和比较 II(SMD-0.49;95%CI-0.76 至 0.21;P(异质性)=0.15)中,住院时间明显缩短。在比较 I(SMD-4.34;95%CI-6.28 至 2.41;P(异质性)=0.02)和比较 II(SMD-0.49;95%CI-0.76 至 0.21;P(异质性)=0.15)中,恢复正常活动的天数也显著减少。然而,在两次比较中,关于无石输血和并发症发生率的分析没有观察到显著差异。在经皮肾造瘘管直径(22-Fr)和引流方法的亚组分析中,除双 J 支架亚组评估手术时间的结果外,大多数结果与总体结果一致。
与标准或小口径 PCNL 相比,无管 PCNL 可减轻疼痛,促进恢复,适用于治疗单纯性肾结石。