Scholarlink

Background <p>There is still controversy about the best minimally invasive surgical method for the treatment of calyceal diverticulum calculi. We conducted meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of PCNL and FURL in the treatment of calyceal diverticulum calculi.</p> Methods <p>We searched Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, Clinical trial platform, CNKI, VIP until April 2024. We utilized the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS, 0 to 9 stars) to assess the quality of the included literature.</p> Results <p>Totally 15 high-quality studies with 755 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed that FURL group was better than PCNL group in blood loss [SMD = 1.713, 95%CI:(0.858, 2.568), <i>Z</i> = 3.928, <i>P</i> = 0.000] and hospital stay [SMD = 2.611, 95%CI: (1.726, 3.496), <i>Z</i> = 5.784, <i>P</i> = 0.000], there was no significant difference in operating time [SMD = 0.079, 95%CI:(-0.43, 0.589), <i>Z</i> = 0.306, <i>P</i> = 0.760], complication rate [OR = 1.793,95%CI: (0.952,2.602), <i>Z</i> = 1.586, <i>P</i> = 0.113], stone-free rate [OR = 1.339, 95%CI: (0.576, 3.112), <i>Z</i> = 0.678, <i>P</i> = 0.497] and symptom-free rate [OR = 3.826,95%CI: (0.561,10.238), <i>Z</i> = 0.966, <i>P</i> = 0.334] as well.</p> Conclusion <p>Whether FURL is indeed superior to PCNL in safety, whether FURL's efficacy is really close to PCNL, and whether FURL can surpass PCNL as the first choice for the treatment of renal diverticulum stones in the future need to be further verified by multi-center, large-sample and high-quality studies.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Percutaneous nephroscopy versus flexible ureteroscopy in the treatment of calyceal diverticulum calculi: a meta-analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年1月2日

查看全文
  • Conglei Hu,
  • Rui Ma,
  • Yongxiang Shao,
  • Zilong Liang,
  • Meng Cheng,
  • Haofeng Pang,
  • Liping Yao,
  • Fei Liu

摘要

Background

There is still controversy about the best minimally invasive surgical method for the treatment of calyceal diverticulum calculi. We conducted meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of PCNL and FURL in the treatment of calyceal diverticulum calculi.

Methods

We searched Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, Clinical trial platform, CNKI, VIP until April 2024. We utilized the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS, 0 to 9 stars) to assess the quality of the included literature.

Results

Totally 15 high-quality studies with 755 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed that FURL group was better than PCNL group in blood loss [SMD = 1.713, 95%CI:(0.858, 2.568), Z = 3.928, P = 0.000] and hospital stay [SMD = 2.611, 95%CI: (1.726, 3.496), Z = 5.784, P = 0.000], there was no significant difference in operating time [SMD = 0.079, 95%CI:(-0.43, 0.589), Z = 0.306, P = 0.760], complication rate [OR = 1.793,95%CI: (0.952,2.602), Z = 1.586, P = 0.113], stone-free rate [OR = 1.339, 95%CI: (0.576, 3.112), Z = 0.678, P = 0.497] and symptom-free rate [OR = 3.826,95%CI: (0.561,10.238), Z = 0.966, P = 0.334] as well.

Conclusion

Whether FURL is indeed superior to PCNL in safety, whether FURL's efficacy is really close to PCNL, and whether FURL can surpass PCNL as the first choice for the treatment of renal diverticulum stones in the future need to be further verified by multi-center, large-sample and high-quality studies.