Department of Urology, Minimally Invasive Surgery center, Guangzhou Institute of Urology, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Urology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Department of organ transplantation, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
PLoS One. 2018 Feb 28;13(2):e0193600. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0193600. eCollection 2018.
The debate still rages on for the usefulness of ureteral access sheath (UAS). Therefore, a meta-analysis to discuss the effects of applying UAS during ureteroscopy was performed. The protocol for the review is available on PROSPERO (CRD42017052327). A literature search was conducted up to November, 2017 using the Web of science, PUBMED, EMBASE and Cochrane Library. The quality of articles was assessed by the Jadad scale and Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS). Egger's test and the trim-and-fill method were used to evaluate publication bias. Effect sizes were calculated by pooled odds ratio (ORs) and mean differences (MDs). Sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses were performed to explore the origin of heterogeneity. Eight trials with a total of 3099 patients and 3127 procedures were identified. Results showed no significant difference in stone-free rate (SFR) (OR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.52-1.33, P = 0.45), intraoperative complications (OR = 1.16, 95% CI 0.81-7.69, P = 0.88), operative time (MD = 4.09, 95% CI -15.08-23.26, P = 0.68) and hospitalization duration (MD = -0.13, 95% CI -0.32-0.06, P = 0.18). However, the incidence of postoperative complications was higher in UAS group (OR = 1.46, 95% CI 1.06-2.00, P = 0.02). Evidence from meta-analysis indicated that the use of UAS during ureteroscopy did not manifest advantages. However, given the intrinsic restrictions of the quality of selected articles, more randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are warranted to update the findings of this analysis.
输尿管导引鞘(UAS)的实用性仍存在争议。因此,进行了荟萃分析以讨论在输尿管镜检查期间应用 UAS 的效果。该综述的方案可在 PROSPERO(CRD42017052327)上获得。截至 2017 年 11 月,使用 Web of Science、PUBMED、EMBASE 和 Cochrane Library 进行了文献检索。使用 Jadad 量表和 Newcastle Ottawa 量表(NOS)评估文章的质量。使用 Egger 检验和修剪填充法评估发表偏倚。使用合并优势比(OR)和平均差异(MD)计算效应大小。进行敏感性分析和亚组分析以探索异质性的来源。确定了八项试验,共 3099 名患者和 3127 例手术。结果显示,无结石率(SFR)(OR = 0.83,95%CI 0.52-1.33,P = 0.45)、术中并发症(OR = 1.16,95%CI 0.81-7.69,P = 0.88)、手术时间(MD = 4.09,95%CI -15.08-23.26,P = 0.68)和住院时间(MD = -0.13,95%CI -0.32-0.06,P = 0.18)无显著差异。然而,UAS 组术后并发症发生率较高(OR = 1.46,95%CI 1.06-2.00,P = 0.02)。荟萃分析的证据表明,在输尿管镜检查期间使用 UAS 并未表现出优势。然而,鉴于所选文章质量的内在限制,需要更多的随机对照试验(RCT)来更新该分析的结果。