Comparison of laparoscopic-assisted flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy with percutaneous nephrolithotripsy and flexible ureteroscopy lithotripsy: a case-control study and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND

This study aims to compare the differences in stone clearance rate, infection rate, and bleeding risk among laparoscopic-assisted flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (LAFUL), percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PCNL), and flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (FUL) through case-control studies and meta-analysis, to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of LAFUL.

METHODS

1. Through systematic literature search, clinical studies related to LAFUL, PCNL, and FUL were screened, and data on stone clearance rate, infection rate, and bleeding events were collected and analyzed for three groups of patients, followed by meta-analysis. 2. Data of patients who met the single center inclusion criteria and received LAFUL (40 cases), PCNL (40 cases, FUL), and FUL (40 cases) treatments for kidney stones from January 2021 to December 2023 were collected. Using a case-control study method, relevant clinical data were analyzed using SPSS 26.0 software.

RESULTS

A total of 31 studies involving 2974 patients were included. The results of case-control analysis showed the stone clearance rate in the LAFUL group (F = 225.19, P < 0.001) and the positive rate of postoperative urine bacterial culture (X = 4.558, P = 0.033). The results of meta-analysis showed the stone clearance rate (rate = 0.986, 95% CI 0.964-0.999) and blood transfusion rate (rate = 0, 95% CI 0-0.012) in the LAFUL group.

CONCLUSION

LAFUL shows potential in improving the stone clearance rate and reducing the risk of postoperative infection and bleeding, suggesting it may have certain advantages in the treatment of renal calculi.