Department of Urology, Institute of Urology (Laboratory of Reconstructive Urology), West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 37 Guo Xue Xiang, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, People's Republic of China.
World J Urol. 2023 Oct;41(10):2659-2669. doi: 10.1007/s00345-023-04559-w. Epub 2023 Aug 11.
In recent years, the minimally invasive surgical treatment methods of ureteropelvic junctional obstruction (UPJO) have been diverse, but its approach and choice of surgical method are controversial. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of minimally invasive surgeries for UPJO, which included robotic or laparoscopic pyeloplasty, via the retroperitoneal or transperitoneal approach.
We searched relevant RCTs in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and CNKI. To assess the results of operative time, complications and success rate, pairwise, and NMA were carried out. The models for analyses were performed by Revman 5.3, Addis V1.16.8 and R software.
A total of 6 RCTs were included in this study involving four types of surgeries: transperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty (T-LP), retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty (R-LP), robot-assisted transperitoneal pyeloplasty (T-RALP), and robot-assisted retroperitoneal pyeloplasty (R-RALP). This study consisted of 381 patients overall. T-RALP had a quicker operational duration (SMD = 1.67, 95% CI 0.27-3.07, P = 0.02) than T-LP. According to the NMA's consistency model, T-RALP improved the surgical success rate more than T-LP (RR = 6303.19, CI 1.28 to 1.47 × 10). Ranking probabilities indicated that RALP could be the better option than LP and retroperitoneal approach was comparable to transperitoneal approach. All procedures had high surgical success rates and few complications.
Outcomes for four surgical approaches used in the UPJO were comparable, with T-RALP being the most recommended approach. Selection between the transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches primarily depended on the surgeon's preference. Higher quality evidence is needed to further enhance the result.
近年来,肾盂输尿管连接部梗阻(UPJO)的微创治疗方法多种多样,但手术入路和方法仍存在争议。本网络荟萃分析(NMA)旨在比较肾盂成形术经后腹腔和腹腔入路的机器人或腹腔镜、后腹腔镜和腹腔镜肾盂成形术治疗 UPJO 的安全性和有效性。
我们检索了 PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、Cochrane 图书馆和中国知网(CNKI)中的相关 RCT。采用配对和 NMA 比较手术时间、并发症和成功率。分析模型由 Revman 5.3、Addis V1.16.8 和 R 软件进行。
本研究共纳入 6 项 RCT,涉及 4 种手术类型:经腹腔腹腔镜肾盂成形术(T-LP)、经后腹腔镜肾盂成形术(R-LP)、机器人辅助经腹腔肾盂成形术(T-RALP)和机器人辅助后腹腔镜肾盂成形术(R-RALP)。本研究共纳入 381 例患者。T-RALP 的手术时间更短(SMD=1.67,95%CI 0.27-3.07,P=0.02)。根据 NMA 一致性模型,T-RALP 比 T-LP 更能提高手术成功率(RR=6303.19,CI 1.28-1.47×10)。排序概率表明,RALP 可能是比 LP 更好的选择,而经腹腔和经后腹腔入路的效果相当。所有手术均具有较高的手术成功率和较少的并发症。
四种 UPJO 手术方法的结果相当,T-RALP 是最推荐的方法。经腹腔和经后腹腔入路的选择主要取决于术者的偏好。需要更高质量的证据来进一步提高结果。