• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

哪种频率更适合小儿冲击波碎石术?低、中还是高频率:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。

Which frequency is better for pediatric shock wave lithotripsy? Low intermediate or high: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

Xiao Kaiwen, Zhou Liang, Zhu Shiyu, Lin Lede, Di Xingpeng, Li Hong

机构信息

Department of Urology/Institute of Urology, West China School of Medicine, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.

出版信息

Front Surg. 2023 Mar 15;10:1063159. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2023.1063159. eCollection 2023.

DOI:10.3389/fsurg.2023.1063159
PMID:37009606
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10050731/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

To explore the optimal frequency for pediatric extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in the treatment of upper urinary stones.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was undertaken using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases to identify eligible studies published before January 2023. Primary outcomes were perioperative efficacy parameters, including ESWL time, anesthesia time for ESWL sessions, success rates after each session, additional interventions needed, and treatment sessions per patient. Secondary outcomes were postoperative complications and efficiency quotient.

RESULTS

Four controlled studies involving 263 pediatric patients were enrolled in our meta-analysis. In the comparison between the low-frequency and intermediate-frequency groups, we observed no significant difference as regards anesthesia time for ESWL session (WMD = -4.98, 95% CI -21.55∼11.58,  = 0.56), success rates after ESWL sessions (first session: OR = 0.02 95%CI -0.12∼0.17,  = 0.74; second session: OR = 1.04 95%CI 0.56∼1.90,  = 0.91; third session: OR = 1.62 95%CI 0.73∼3.60,  = 0.24), treatment sessions needed (WMD = 0.08 95%CI -0.21∼0.36,  = 0.60), additional interventions after ESWL (OR=0.99 95%CI 0.40∼2.47,  = 0.99) and rates of Clavien grade 2 complications (OR = 0.92 95%CI 0.18∼4.69,  = 0.92). However, the intermediate-frequency group may exhibit potential benefits in Clavien grade 1 complications. In the comparison between intermediate-frequency and high-frequency, the eligible studies exhibited higher success rates in the intermediate-frequency group after the first session, the second session and the third session. More sessions may be required in the high-frequency group. With respect to other perioperative, postoperative parameters and major complications, the results were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Intermediate-frequency and low-frequency had similar success rates and seemed to be the optimal frequency for pediatric ESWL. Nevertheless, future large-volume, well-designed RCTs are awaited to confirm and update the findings of this analysis.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42022333646.

摘要

背景

探讨小儿体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)治疗上尿路结石的最佳频率。

方法

通过检索PubMed、Embase、Web of Science和Cochrane对照试验中央注册库数据库进行系统文献检索,以识别2023年1月前发表的符合条件的研究。主要结局为围手术期疗效参数,包括ESWL时间、每次ESWL治疗的麻醉时间、每次治疗后的成功率、所需的额外干预措施以及每位患者的治疗次数。次要结局为术后并发症和效率商数。

结果

四项涉及263例儿科患者的对照研究纳入了我们的荟萃分析。在低频组和中频组的比较中,我们观察到ESWL治疗的麻醉时间(加权均数差[WMD]= -4.98,95%可信区间[-21.55,11.58],P = 0.56)、ESWL治疗后成功率(首次治疗:比值比[OR]= 0.02,95%可信区间[-0.12,0.17],P = 0.74;第二次治疗:OR = 1.04,95%可信区间[0.56,1.90],P = 0.91;第三次治疗:OR = 1.62,95%可信区间[0.73,3.60],P = 0.24)、所需治疗次数(WMD = 0.08,95%可信区间[-0.21,0.36],P = 0.60)、ESWL治疗后的额外干预措施(OR = 0.99,95%可信区间[0.40,2.47],P = 0.99)以及Clavien 2级并发症发生率(OR = 0.92,95%可信区间[0.18,4.69],P = 0.92)方面无显著差异。然而,中频组在Clavien 1级并发症方面可能显示出潜在益处。在中频组和高频组的比较中,符合条件的研究显示中频组在首次治疗、第二次治疗和第三次治疗后成功率更高。高频组可能需要更多治疗次数。关于其他围手术期、术后参数和主要并发症,结果相似。

结论

中频和低频的成功率相似,似乎是小儿ESWL的最佳频率。然而,期待未来有大规模、设计良好的随机对照试验来证实和更新本分析的结果。

系统评价注册

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/,标识符:CRD42022333646。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9e62/10050731/d1e4bc668c09/fsurg-10-1063159-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9e62/10050731/8ac87f664140/fsurg-10-1063159-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9e62/10050731/581bbfcf6a99/fsurg-10-1063159-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9e62/10050731/d1e4bc668c09/fsurg-10-1063159-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9e62/10050731/8ac87f664140/fsurg-10-1063159-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9e62/10050731/581bbfcf6a99/fsurg-10-1063159-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9e62/10050731/d1e4bc668c09/fsurg-10-1063159-g003.jpg

相似文献

1
Which frequency is better for pediatric shock wave lithotripsy? Low intermediate or high: A systematic review and meta-analysis.哪种频率更适合小儿冲击波碎石术?低、中还是高频率:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Front Surg. 2023 Mar 15;10:1063159. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2023.1063159. eCollection 2023.
2
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stones.体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)与经皮肾镜取石术(PCNL)或逆行肾内手术(RIRS)治疗肾结石的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Oct 7(4):CD007044. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007044.pub2.
3
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
4
The clinical efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in pediatric urolithiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.体外冲击波碎石术治疗小儿尿路结石的临床疗效:一项系统评价和荟萃分析
Urolithiasis. 2015 Jun;43(3):199-206. doi: 10.1007/s00240-015-0757-5. Epub 2015 Feb 27.
5
Efficacy of acupuncture for pain relief in patients receiving extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies.针刺疗法对接受体外冲击波碎石术患者的止痛效果:一项随机对照研究的荟萃分析
Front Med (Lausanne). 2023 Jun 2;10:1114485. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1114485. eCollection 2023.
6
Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy and Combined Therapy in Children: Efficacy and Long-Term Results.儿童体外冲击波碎石术及联合治疗:疗效与长期结果
Front Pediatr. 2021 May 13;9:609664. doi: 10.3389/fped.2021.609664. eCollection 2021.
7
Factors affecting the outcome of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for unilateral urinary stones in children: a 17-year single-institute experience.影响儿童单侧尿路结石体外冲击波碎石术治疗效果的因素:一项17年单中心经验
Korean J Urol. 2013 Jul;54(7):460-6. doi: 10.4111/kju.2013.54.7.460. Epub 2013 Jul 15.
8
[Characteristics and efficiency of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in children using ultrasound guidance].[超声引导下儿童体外冲击波碎石术的特点及疗效]
Urologiia. 2020 Sep(4):90-94.
9
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus ureteroscopic management for ureteric calculi.体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)与输尿管镜治疗输尿管结石的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Dec 7(12):CD006029. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006029.pub3.
10
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus ureteroscopic management for ureteric calculi.体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)与输尿管镜治疗输尿管结石的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 May 16;2012(5):CD006029. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006029.pub4.

本文引用的文献

1
European Association of Urology and European Society for Paediatric Urology Guidelines on Paediatric Urinary Stone Disease.欧洲泌尿外科学会和欧洲小儿泌尿外科学会儿童尿石病指南。
Eur Urol Focus. 2022 May;8(3):833-839. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2021.05.006. Epub 2021 May 26.
2
Which frequency is better for pediatric shock wave lithotripsy? Intermediate or low: a prospective randomized study.对于小儿冲击波碎石术,哪种频率更好?中能还是低能:一项前瞻性随机研究。
World J Urol. 2021 Oct;39(10):3963-3969. doi: 10.1007/s00345-021-03696-4. Epub 2021 Apr 22.
3
What is the optimal frequency in shock wave lithotripsy for pediatric renal stones? A prospective randomized study.
小儿肾结石冲击波碎石术的最佳频率是多少?一项前瞻性随机研究。
Urolithiasis. 2021 Aug;49(4):377-383. doi: 10.1007/s00240-021-01246-6. Epub 2021 Mar 11.
4
Factors affecting the success of pediatric extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy therapy: 26-year experience at a single institution.影响小儿体外冲击波碎石术治疗成功的因素:单机构 26 年经验。
Turk J Pediatr. 2020;62(1):68-79. doi: 10.24953/turkjped.2020.01.010.
5
Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.《可信系统评价的更新指南:干预措施系统评价的新版Cochrane手册》
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Oct 3;10(10):ED000142. doi: 10.1002/14651858.ED000142.
6
Which is the best treatment of pediatric upper urinary tract stones among extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery: a systematic review.体外冲击波碎石术、经皮肾镜取石术和逆行性肾内手术治疗小儿上尿路结石的最佳治疗方法:系统评价。
BMC Urol. 2019 Oct 23;19(1):98. doi: 10.1186/s12894-019-0520-2.
7
Medical and surgical interventions for the treatment of urinary stones in children.儿童尿路结石治疗的医学及外科干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jun 2;6(6):CD010784. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010784.pub2.
8
Comparison of intermediate- and low-frequency shock wave lithotripsy for pediatric kidney stones.比较中低频冲击波碎石术治疗小儿肾结石。
Urolithiasis. 2018 Aug;46(4):391-395. doi: 10.1007/s00240-017-1002-1. Epub 2017 Jul 29.
9
Simple and practical nomograms for predicting the stone-free rate after shock wave lithotripsy in patients with a solitary upper ureteral stone.冲击波碎石术后单个输尿管上段结石患者无石率的预测简单实用的列线图。
World J Urol. 2017 Sep;35(9):1455-1461. doi: 10.1007/s00345-017-2014-8. Epub 2017 Feb 20.
10
Do anesthetics harm the developing human brain? An integrative analysis of animal and human studies.麻醉剂会损害发育中的人类大脑吗?动物和人类研究的综合分析。
Neurotoxicol Teratol. 2017 Mar-Apr;60:117-128. doi: 10.1016/j.ntt.2016.10.008. Epub 2016 Oct 26.