Suppr超能文献

逆行性肾内手术与经皮肾镜取石术及体外冲击波碎石术治疗下极肾结石的Meta分析和系统评价

Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery Versus Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Versus Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy for Treatment of Lower Pole Renal Stones: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

作者信息

Zhang Wei, Zhou Tie, Wu Tengyun, Gao Xiaofeng, Peng Yonghan, Xu Chuanliang, Chen Qi, Song Ruixiang, Sun Yinghao

机构信息

1 Department of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University , Shanghai, China .

2 Laboratory of Stress Medicine, Faculty of Psychology and Mental Health, Second Military Medical University , Shanghai, China .

出版信息

J Endourol. 2015 Jul;29(7):745-59. doi: 10.1089/end.2014.0799. Epub 2015 Feb 5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The optimal treatment of patients with lower pole renal stones continues to be a dilemma for urologists. Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), and extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) all constitute viable therapeutic options in selected patients. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of RIRS, PCNL, and SWL in management of lower pole renal stones.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in July 2014 using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases. Literature reviewed included meta-analysis and randomized and nonrandomized controlled studies to identify relevant studies for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Six randomized and eight nonrandomized studies were identified for analysis. PCNL provided a significantly higher stone-free rate (SFR) compared with RIRS and SWL. Furthermore, no statistical significant difference was found when PCNL was compared with RIRS and SWL for complication rate. Compared with the other two treatments, RIRS had a longer operative time and PCNL had a longer hospital stay. SWL was associated with significantly higher re-treatment rate compared with RIRS and PCNL, whereas there were no significant differences in auxiliary procedure rates among the three treatment techniques.

CONCLUSION

RIRS offers a relative higher SFR while it has a longer operative time. PCNL is associated with the highest SFR at the expense of the longest hospital stay. SWL is performed as an outpatient procedure with a relative shorter operative time; however, it has lower a SFR and higher re-treatment rate. The categories of complications vary while the overall complication rates are comparable among the three treatment techniques.

摘要

背景与目的

下极肾结石患者的最佳治疗方案一直是泌尿外科医生面临的难题。逆行肾内手术(RIRS)、经皮肾镜取石术(PCNL)和体外冲击波碎石术(SWL)在特定患者中均构成可行的治疗选择。本研究的目的是评估RIRS、PCNL和SWL治疗下极肾结石的疗效和安全性。

方法

2014年7月使用PubMed、Embase和Web of Science数据库进行文献检索。所回顾的文献包括荟萃分析以及随机和非随机对照研究,以确定用于荟萃分析的相关研究。

结果

共确定6项随机研究和8项非随机研究进行分析。与RIRS和SWL相比,PCNL的结石清除率(SFR)显著更高。此外,将PCNL与RIRS和SWL的并发症发生率进行比较时,未发现统计学上的显著差异。与其他两种治疗方法相比,RIRS的手术时间更长,PCNL的住院时间更长。与RIRS和PCNL相比,SWL的再次治疗率显著更高,而三种治疗技术的辅助手术率没有显著差异。

结论

RIRS的SFR相对较高,但手术时间较长。PCNL的SFR最高,但住院时间最长。SWL作为门诊手术,手术时间相对较短;然而,其SFR较低且再次治疗率较高。三种治疗技术的并发症类型各不相同,但总体并发症发生率相当。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验