Literature DB >> 26936378

Comparison of laparoscopic stone surgery and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the management of large upper urinary stones: a meta-analysis.

Chenming Zhao1,2, Huan Yang1,2, Kun Tang1,2, Ding Xia1,2, Hua Xu1,2, Zhiqiang Chen3,4, Zhangqun Ye1,2.   

Abstract

For the treatment of large upper urinary stones percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is generally considered the first choice, and Laparoscopic Stone Surgery (LSS) is an alternative. We aim to compare the efficiency and safety of PCNL with LSS, as far as the management of large upper urinary stones is concerned. A systematic search from Pubmed, Web of Science, Wiley Online Library and Elsevier was performed up to August 1, 2015 for the relevant published studies. After data extraction and quality assessment, meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.3 software. 15 eligible trials evaluating LSS vs. PCNL were identified including 6 prospective and 9 retrospective studies with 473 patients undergoing LSS and 523 patients undergoing PCNL. Although LSS led to longer operative time (p = 0.01) and higher open conversion rate (p = 0.02), patients might benefit from significantly fewer overall complications (p = 0.03), especially lower bleeding rate (p = 0.02), smaller drop in hemoglobin level (p < 0.001), less need of blood transfusion (p = 0.01). The stone free rate was also higher for LSS compared with PCNL (p < 0.001) with less secondary/complementary procedure (p = 0.006). There was no significant difference in other demographic parameters between the two groups. Our data suggests that LSS turns out to be a safe and feasible alternative to PCNL for large upper urinary stones with less bleeding and higher stone free rate. Because of the inherent limitations of the included studies, further large sample prospective, multi-centric studies and randomized control trials should be undertaken to confirm our findings.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Laparoscopic stone surgery (LSS); Large upper urinary stone; Meta-analysis; Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL)

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26936378     DOI: 10.1007/s00240-016-0862-0

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


  24 in total

1.  Bringing it all together: Lancet-Cochrane collaborate on systematic reviews.

Authors:  M Clarke; R Horton
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2001-06-02       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  The comparison of laparoscopic pyelolithotomy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of solitary large renal pelvic stones.

Authors:  Ahmet Tefekli; Abdulkadir Tepeler; Tolga Akman; Muzaffer Akçay; Murat Baykal; Mert Ali Karadağ; Ahmet Y Muslumanoglu; Jean de la Rosette
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2012-02-04

3.  Retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyelolithotomy: how does it compare with percutaneous nephrolithotomy for larger stones?

Authors: 
Journal:  Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 2.442

Review 4.  Laparoscopic management in stone disease.

Authors:  Nasser Simforoosh; Alireza Aminsharifi
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 2.309

5.  Comparative study of laparoscopic pyelolithotomy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the management of large renal pelvic stones.

Authors:  Yasser M Haggag; Gamal Morsy; Magdy M Badr; Abdel Baset A Al Emam; Mourad Farid; Mohamed Etafy
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 6.  History, epidemiology and regional diversities of urolithiasis.

Authors:  Michelle López; Bernd Hoppe
Journal:  Pediatr Nephrol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 3.714

7.  Retrograde, antegrade, and laparoscopic approaches to the management of large upper ureteral stones after shockwave lithotripsy failure: a four-year retrospective study.

Authors:  Hongjian Zhu; Xiongjun Ye; Xuren Xiao; Xianglong Chen; Qingjiang Zhang; Hua Wang
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2013-10-04       Impact factor: 2.942

8.  Laparoscopic pyelolithotomy: indications and technique.

Authors:  Brandan A Kramer; Lara Hammond; Bradley F Schwartz
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 2.942

9.  Evaluation of role of retroperitoneoscopic pyelolithotomy and its comparison with percutaneous nephrolithotripsy.

Authors:  Apul Goel; A K Hemal
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.370

10.  Clinical observation of different minimally invasive surgeries for the treatment of impacted upper ureteral calculi.

Authors:  Yuanhua Liu; Zhangyan Zhou; An Xia; Haitao Dai; Linjie Guo; Jiang Zheng
Journal:  Pak J Med Sci       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 1.088

View more
  5 in total

1.  Urgent laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for proximal ureter stones accompanied with obstructive pyelonephritis: Is it safe and effective without preoperative drainage?

Authors:  Huan Yang; Xiao Yu; Ejun Peng; Cong Li; Lei Cui; Xing Zeng; Shen Wang; Chao Wei; Zhihua Wang; Xiaolin Guo; Zhiqiang Chen; Zhangqun Ye; Shaogang Wang; Chenming Zhao
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 1.817

2.  Postoperative Renal Outcomes of Patients Receiving Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy versus Pyelolithotomy: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

Authors:  Fang-Ting Chen; Fu-Chao Liu; Chih-Wen Cheng; Jr-Rung Lin; Huang-Ping Yu
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2018-05-02       Impact factor: 3.411

3.  Efficacy and safety of various surgical treatments for proximal ureteral stone ≥10mm: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yaxuan Wang; Xueliang Chang; Jingdong Li; Zhenwei Han
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2020 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.541

4.  Suctioning semirigid ureteroscopic lithotomy versus minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy for large upper ureteral stones: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Hequn Chen; Zewu Zhu; Yu Cui; Yang Li; Zhiyong Chen; Zhongqing Yang; Feng Zeng
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-03

5.  Editorial Comment: Laparoscopic - assisted transpyelic rigid nephroscopy - simple alternative when flexible ureteroscopy is not available.

Authors:  David J Hernandez
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.541

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.