Suppr超能文献

老年结石病的输尿管镜检查:安全有效吗?一项系统评价与荟萃分析。

Ureteroscopy for stone disease in the elderly. is it safe and effective? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

Calvillo-Ramirez Alejandro, Cardenas Jesse Sanchez, Del Rio-Martinez Christopher J, Esparza-Miranda Luis A, Palacios-Navas Andrea G, Angulo-Lozano Juan Carlos, Hinojosa-Gonzalez David, Salvadó José Antonio, Pauchard Felipe

机构信息

Urology Institute, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, 11100 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA.

Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Autonoma de Baja California, Ensenada, Baja California, Mexico.

出版信息

World J Urol. 2025 Aug 11;43(1):482. doi: 10.1007/s00345-025-05868-y.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Rising life expectancy has led to a growing number of elderly individuals requiring urological care. Ureteroscopy (URS), a first-line surgical treatment for urinary stones < 2 cm, presents unique challenges in this population, where evidence remains limited. This meta-analysis sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of URS for urolithiasis in elderly patients compared to a younger cohort.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for studies comparing URS outcomes between elderly and younger patients. Studies were stratified based on age cutoffs for older individuals, with five primary cutoffs employed for subgroup analysis: ≥ 60, ≥ 65, ≥ 75, ≥ 80, and ≥ 85 years old. Primary outcomes included stone-free rate (SFR) and minor and major complications. Secondary outcomes were operative time (OT), length of stay (LOS), and reintervention rates.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies encompassing 7,664 patients were included. No significant differences were observed between groups in SFR (OR 1.03 [95%confidence interval [CI] 0.86-1.23], p = 0.72), minor (OR 1.23 [95%CI 0.87-1.76], p = 0.22) or major complications (OR 1.41 [95%CI0.85-2.32], p = 0.18). While elderly patients experienced a longer LOS (MD 0.97 [95%CI0.09-1.84], p = 0.03), OT and reintervention rates were comparable between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

URS appears to be a viable treatment option for elderly patients deemed suitable for active stone management. The procedure did not increase the risk of minor or major complications, and provided equivalent SFR, although longer LOS may be expected in this population. Future research with standardized elderly definitions and extended follow-up is essential to better delineate the role of URS in this demographic.

摘要

目的

预期寿命的延长导致需要泌尿外科护理的老年人数量不断增加。输尿管镜检查(URS)是治疗直径小于2厘米尿路结石的一线手术治疗方法,在这一人群中面临着独特的挑战,相关证据仍然有限。本荟萃分析旨在评估与年轻队列相比,URS治疗老年患者尿路结石的安全性和有效性。

方法

我们系统检索了PubMed、Embase和Cochrane数据库,以查找比较老年患者和年轻患者URS治疗结果的研究。根据老年人的年龄界限对研究进行分层,采用五个主要界限进行亚组分析:≥60岁、≥65岁、≥75岁、≥80岁和≥85岁。主要结局包括结石清除率(SFR)以及轻微和严重并发症。次要结局为手术时间(OT)、住院时间(LOS)和再次干预率。

结果

纳入了14项研究,共7664例患者。在SFR(比值比[OR]1.03[95%置信区间[CI]0.86 - 1.23],p = 0.72)、轻微(OR 1.23[95%CI 0.87 - 1.76],p = 0.22)或严重并发症(OR 1.41[95%CI 0.85 - 2.32],p = 0.18)方面,各亚组间未观察到显著差异。虽然老年患者的住院时间更长(平均差[MD]0.97[95%CI 0.09 - 1.84],p = 0.03),但两组间的手术时间和再次干预率相当。

结论

对于被认为适合积极结石管理的老年患者,URS似乎是一种可行的治疗选择。该手术并未增加轻微或严重并发症的风险,且结石清除率相当,尽管这一人群可能预期住院时间更长。未来开展具有标准化老年定义和延长随访时间的研究,对于更好地界定URS在这一人群中的作用至关重要。

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