Literature DB >> 26530230

Flexible ureterorenoscopy (F-URS) with holmium laser versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for treatment of renal stone <2 cm: a meta-analysis.

Yuanyuan Mi1, Kewei Ren2, Haiyan Pan1, Lijie Zhu3, Sheng Wu1, Xiaoming You1, Hongbao Shao1, Feng Dai1, Tao Peng1, Feng Qin1, Jian Wang1, Yi Huang1.   

Abstract

The objective of the study was to systematically review the efficacy and safety of flexible ureterorenoscopy (F-URS) with holmium laser versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for the treatment of renal stone <2 cm. A systematic literature review was performed in April 2015 using the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Chinese Biomedical Literature (CNKI and Wanfang) databases to identify relevant studies. All clinical trials were retrieved and their included references investigated. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of all included studies, and the eligible studies were included and analyzed using the RevMan 5.3 software. Six prospective randomized comparison trials and eight retrospective comparison trials were included, involving a total of 2348 patients. For renal stone 1-2 cm, F-URS technique provided a significantly higher stone-free rate (SFR) [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 2.35, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.65-3.34, P < 0.00001], lower auxiliary procedure rate (APR) [odds ratio (OR) 0.33, 95 % CI 0.22-0.50, P < 0.00001] and lower retreatment rate (RR) (OR 0.07, 95 % CI 0.01-0.37, P = 0.002). Similar results were found in the lower pole stone for 1-2 cm subgroup. For renal stone <1 cm, F-URS technique also showed a significantly higher SFR than ESWL (WMD = 2.13, 95 % CI 1.13-4.00, P = 0.02). F-URS is associated with higher SFR, lower APR and RR than ESWL. F-URS is a safe and effective procedure. It can successfully treat patients with stones for 1-2 cm, especially for lower pole stone, without increasing complications, operative time and hospital stay. F-URS can be used as an alternative treatment to ESWL in selected cases with larger renal stones. However, further randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy; Flexible ureterorenoscopy; Lower pole stone; Meta-analysis; Renal stone; Stone-free

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26530230     DOI: 10.1007/s00240-015-0832-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urolithiasis        ISSN: 2194-7228            Impact factor:   3.436


  41 in total

1.  Evolution of stone management in Australia.

Authors:  Ming-Chak Lee; Simon Virgil Bariol
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 5.588

2.  The surgical management of kidney stone disease: a population based time series analysis.

Authors:  Michael Ordon; David Urbach; Muhammad Mamdani; Refik Saskin; R John D'A Honey; Kenneth T Pace
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2014-05-24       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Limitations of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for lower caliceal stones: anatomic insight.

Authors:  F J Sampaio; A H Aragao
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 2.942

4.  Retrograde intrarenal surgery versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the management of lower-pole renal stones with a diameter of 15 to 20 mm.

Authors:  Omer F Bozkurt; Berkan Resorlu; Yildiray Yildiz; Ceren E Can; Ali Unsal
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2011-06-09       Impact factor: 2.942

5.  Cost-effectiveness and efficiency of shockwave lithotripsy vs flexible ureteroscopic holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser lithotripsy in the treatment of lower pole renal calculi.

Authors:  Vincent Koo; Michael Young; Trevor Thompson; Brian Duggan
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2011-03-31       Impact factor: 5.588

6.  Outcomes of shockwave lithotripsy for upper urinary-tract stones: a large-scale study at a single institution.

Authors:  Taku Abe; Koichiro Akakura; Makoto Kawaguchi; Takeshi Ueda; Tomohiko Ichikawa; Haruo Ito; Kuniyoshi Nozumi; Kazuhiro Suzuki
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 2.942

7.  Efficacy and safety of a new-generation shockwave lithotripsy machine in the treatment of single renal or ureteral stones: Experience with 2670 patients.

Authors:  Tulga Egilmez; Mehmet Ilteris Tekin; Murat Gonen; Ferhat Kilinc; Resit Goren; Hakan Ozkardes
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 2.942

8.  Contemporary Management of Medium-Sized (10-20 mm) Renal Stones: A Retrospective Multicenter Observational Study.

Authors:  Murat Can Kiremit; Selcuk Guven; Kemal Sarica; Ahmet Ozturk; Ibrahim Buldu; Alper Kafkasli; Mehmet Balasar; Okan Istanbulluoglu; Rahim Horuz; Cihangir Ali Cetinel; Abdulkadir Kandemir; Selami Albayrak
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2015-03-06       Impact factor: 2.942

9.  Trends in surgery for upper urinary tract calculi in the USA using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample: 1999-2009.

Authors:  Khurshid R Ghani; Jesse D Sammon; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Maxine Sun; Naeem Bhojani; Shyam Sukumar; James O Peabody; Mani Menon; Quoc-Dien Trinh
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2013-03-11       Impact factor: 5.588

10.  Comparison of shock wave lithotripsy, flexible ureterorenoscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotripsy on moderate size renal pelvis stones.

Authors:  Okan Bas; Hasan Bakirtas; Nevzat Can Sener; Ufuk Ozturk; Can Tuygun; H N Goksel Goktug; M Abdurrahim Imamoglu
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2013-10-27       Impact factor: 3.436

View more
  10 in total

Review 1.  To Dust or Not To Dust: a Systematic Review of Ureteroscopic Laser Lithotripsy Techniques.

Authors:  Javier E Santiago; Adam B Hollander; Samit D Soni; Richard E Link; Wesley A Mayer
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.092

2.  Management of lower pole renal stones: the devil is in the details.

Authors:  Berkan Resorlu; Yasar Issi; Kadir Onem; Cankon Germiyanoglu
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-03

3.  Predictive factors of stone-free rate and complications in patients undergoing minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy under local infiltration anesthesia.

Authors:  Ke Chen; Kai Xu; Bingkun Li; Shusheng Wang; Songtao Xiang; Hulin Li
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2020-01-07       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  Comparison of two techniques for the management of 2-3 cm lower pole renal calculi in obese patients.

Authors:  Xiao Liu; Ding Xia; Ejun Peng; Yonghua Tong; Hailang Liu; Xinguang Wang; Yu He; Zhiqiang Chen; Kun Tang
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-11-12       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  Shock-wave lithotripsy or ureterorenoscopy for renal stones?

Authors:  Pietro Manuel Ferraro; Francesco Pinto; Giovanni Gambaro
Journal:  Clin Kidney J       Date:  2018-04-11

6.  A comparison among PCNL, Miniperc and Ultraminiperc for lower calyceal stones between 1 and 2 cm: a prospective, comparative, multicenter and randomised study.

Authors:  Giorgio Bozzini; Tahsin Batuhan Aydogan; Alexander Müller; Maria Chiara Sighinolfi; Umberto Besana; Alberto Calori; Berti Lorenzo; Alexander Govorov; Dmitry Y Pushkar; Giovannalberto Pini; Antonio Luigi Pastore; Javier Romero-Otero; Bernardo Rocco; Carlo Buizza
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2020-06-10       Impact factor: 2.264

7.  Surgical management of urolithiasis - a systematic analysis of available guidelines.

Authors:  Valentin Zumstein; Patrick Betschart; Dominik Abt; Hans-Peter Schmid; Cedric Michael Panje; Paul Martin Putora
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2018-04-10       Impact factor: 2.264

8.  Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus flexible ureterorenoscopy in the treatment of untreated renal calculi.

Authors:  Christian D Fankhauser; Thomas Hermanns; Laura Lieger; Olivia Diethelm; Martin Umbehr; Thomas Luginbühl; Tullio Sulser; Michael Müntener; Cédric Poyet
Journal:  Clin Kidney J       Date:  2018-01-25

9.  Laparoscopic pyelolithotomy as a monotherapy for the management of intermediate-sized renal pelvic stones.

Authors:  Musliyarakath Mujeeburahiman; Chembili Vipin
Journal:  Urol Ann       Date:  2018 Jul-Sep

10.  Effectiveness of Flexible Ureterorenoscopy Versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Renal Calculi of 5-15 mm: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Christian Daniel Fankhauser; Damian Weber; Michael Müntener; Cedric Poyet; Tullio Sulser; Thomas Hermanns
Journal:  Eur Urol Open Sci       Date:  2021-02-02
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.