Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Urolithiasis 1/2023

01.12.2023 | Review

Efficacy and safety of various endosurgical procedures for management of large renal stone: a systemic review and network meta-analysis of randomised control trials

Erschienen in: Urolithiasis | Ausgabe 1/2023

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Urolithiasis is the most common benign urological health condition. It has contributed sizeable burden of morbidity, disability, and medical health expenditure worldwide. There is limited high level of evidence on the efficacy and safety of treatment options of large renal stones. This network meta-analysis has examined the effectiveness and safety of various large renal stone management strategies. Systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) study design was employed to summarize comparative randomized controlled trials on humans with a diagnosis of renal stone larger than or equal to 2 cm in size. Our searching strategy was based on the Population, Interventions, Comparison, Outcomes, and Study (PICOS) approach. Medline via PubMed, Embase, Google scholar, SCOPUS, Science Direct, Cochrane library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to March 2023 to find eligible articles. Data extraction, screening, selection and risk of bias assessment were conducted by two independent reviewers. We found ten randomised control trials which consists 2917 patients, nine of them were labeled as low risk and one article was high risk. This network meta-analysis found that SFR was 86% (95% CI 84–88%) for Mini-PCNL, 86% (95% CI 84–88%) for standard PCNL, 79% (95% CI:73–86%) for RIRS, and 67% (95%CI:49–81 for staged URS for management of large renal stone. Overall complication rate was 32% (95% CI 27–38%) for standard PCNL, 16% (95% CI 12–21%) for Mini-PCNL, and 11% (95% CI 7–16%) for RIRS. Mini-PCNL (RR = 1.14 (95% CI 1.01–1.27) and PCNL (RR = 1.13 (95% CI 1.01–1.27)) were statistically associated with a higher SFR compared to RIRS. The pooled mean hospital stays were 1.56 days (95% CI 0.93–2.19) for RIRS, 2.96 days (95% CI 1.78–4.14) for Mini-PCNL, 3.9 days (95% CI 2.9–4.83) for standard PCNL, and 3.66 (95% CI 1.13–6.2) for staged URS. Mini-PCNL and standard PCNL were the most effective treatment options with significant morbidity and length of hospital stay, while RIRS was the safest management option with acceptable SFR, low morbidity, and short hospital stay.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Zhang L, Zhang X, Pu Y, Zhang Y, Fan J (2022) Global, regional, and national burden of urolithiasis from 1990 to 2019: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2019. Clin Epidemiol 15(14):971–983. https://doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S370591. (PMID:35996396; PMCID:PMC9391934)CrossRef Zhang L, Zhang X, Pu Y, Zhang Y, Fan J (2022) Global, regional, and national burden of urolithiasis from 1990 to 2019: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2019. Clin Epidemiol 15(14):971–983. https://​doi.​org/​10.​2147/​CLEP.​S370591. (PMID:35996396; PMCID:PMC9391934)CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Antonelli JA, Maalouf NM, Pearle MS, Lotan Y (2014) Use of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey to calculate the impact of obesity and diabetes on cost and prevalence of urolithiasis in 2030. Eur Urol 66(4):724–729CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Antonelli JA, Maalouf NM, Pearle MS, Lotan Y (2014) Use of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey to calculate the impact of obesity and diabetes on cost and prevalence of urolithiasis in 2030. Eur Urol 66(4):724–729CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Assimos D, Krambeck A, Miller NL et al (2016) Surgical management of stones: American Urological Association/Endourological Society Guideline, part II. J Urol 196:1161CrossRefPubMed Assimos D, Krambeck A, Miller NL et al (2016) Surgical management of stones: American Urological Association/Endourological Society Guideline, part II. J Urol 196:1161CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, Shekelle P, Stewart LA (2015) Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 215: elaboration and explanation. BMJ 350:g7647. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7647. (Erratum in: BMJ. 2016 Jul 21;354:i4086. PMID: 25555855)CrossRefPubMed Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, Shekelle P, Stewart LA (2015) Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 215: elaboration and explanation. BMJ 350:g7647. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1136/​bmj.​g7647. (Erratum in: BMJ. 2016 Jul 21;354:i4086. PMID: 25555855)CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Edoardo Aromataris E, Riitano D (2014) Constructing a search strategy and searching for evidence. AJN 114(5):49–56CrossRefPubMed Edoardo Aromataris E, Riitano D (2014) Constructing a search strategy and searching for evidence. AJN 114(5):49–56CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat McKenzie JE, Brennan SE, Ryan RE, Thomson HJ, Johnston RV, Thomas J (2019) Chapter 3: Defining the criteria for including studies and how they will be grouped for the synthesis. In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, 2nd edn. Wiley, Chichester, pp 33–66CrossRef McKenzie JE, Brennan SE, Ryan RE, Thomson HJ, Johnston RV, Thomas J (2019) Chapter 3: Defining the criteria for including studies and how they will be grouped for the synthesis. In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, 2nd edn. Wiley, Chichester, pp 33–66CrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Thomas J, Kneale D, McKenzie JE, Brennan SE, Bhaumik S (2019) Chapter 2: Determining the scope of the review and the questions it will address. In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, 2nd edn. Wiley, Chichester, pp 13–32CrossRef Thomas J, Kneale D, McKenzie JE, Brennan SE, Bhaumik S (2019) Chapter 2: Determining the scope of the review and the questions it will address. In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, 2nd edn. Wiley, Chichester, pp 13–32CrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Lefebvre C, Glanville J, Briscoe S, Littlewood A, Marshall C, Metzendorf M-I, Noel-Storr A, Rader T, Shokraneh F, Thomas J, Wieland LS (2019) Chapter 4: Searching for and selecting studies. In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, 2nd edn. Wiley, Chichester, pp 67–108CrossRef Lefebvre C, Glanville J, Briscoe S, Littlewood A, Marshall C, Metzendorf M-I, Noel-Storr A, Rader T, Shokraneh F, Thomas J, Wieland LS (2019) Chapter 4: Searching for and selecting studies. In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, 2nd edn. Wiley, Chichester, pp 67–108CrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (editors). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 6.3 (updated February 2022). Cochrane, 2022. Available from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (editors). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 6.3 (updated February 2022). Cochrane, 2022. Available from www.​training.​cochrane.​org/​handbook
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Blencowe NS, Boutron I, Cates CJ, Cheng HY, Corbett MS, Eldridge SM, Emberson JR, Hernán MA, Hopewell S, Hróbjartsson A, Junqueira DR, Jüni P, Kirkham JJ, Lasserson T, Li T, McAleenan A, Reeves BC, Shepperd S, Shrier I, Stewart LA, Tilling K, White IR, Whiting PF, Higgins JPT (2019) RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 366:l4898. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l4898. (PMID: 31462531)CrossRefPubMed Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Blencowe NS, Boutron I, Cates CJ, Cheng HY, Corbett MS, Eldridge SM, Emberson JR, Hernán MA, Hopewell S, Hróbjartsson A, Junqueira DR, Jüni P, Kirkham JJ, Lasserson T, Li T, McAleenan A, Reeves BC, Shepperd S, Shrier I, Stewart LA, Tilling K, White IR, Whiting PF, Higgins JPT (2019) RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 366:l4898. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1136/​bmj.​l4898. (PMID: 31462531)CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Deeks JJ, Higgins JPT, Altman DG (2008) Chapter 9: Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Wiley, Chichester Deeks JJ, Higgins JPT, Altman DG (2008) Chapter 9: Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Wiley, Chichester
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Bryniarski P, Paradysz A, Zyczkowski M, Kupilas A, Nowakowski K, Bogacki R (2012) A randomized controlled study to analyze the safety and efficacy of percutaneous nephrolithotripsy and retrograde intrarenal surgery in the management of renal stones more than 2 cm in diameter. J Endourol 26(1):52–57. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2011.0235. (Epub 2011 Oct 17; PMID: 22003819)CrossRefPubMed Bryniarski P, Paradysz A, Zyczkowski M, Kupilas A, Nowakowski K, Bogacki R (2012) A randomized controlled study to analyze the safety and efficacy of percutaneous nephrolithotripsy and retrograde intrarenal surgery in the management of renal stones more than 2 cm in diameter. J Endourol 26(1):52–57. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1089/​end.​2011.​0235. (Epub 2011 Oct 17; PMID: 22003819)CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Kandemir E, Savun M, Sezer A, Erbin A, Akbulut MF, Sarılar Ö (2020) Comparison of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy in secondary patients: a randomized prospective study. J Endourol 34(1):26–32. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2019.0538. (Epub 2019 Oct 17 PMID: 31537115)CrossRefPubMed Kandemir E, Savun M, Sezer A, Erbin A, Akbulut MF, Sarılar Ö (2020) Comparison of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy in secondary patients: a randomized prospective study. J Endourol 34(1):26–32. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1089/​end.​2019.​0538. (Epub 2019 Oct 17 PMID: 31537115)CrossRefPubMed
24.
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Sakr A, Salem E, Kamel M, Desoky E, Ragab A, Omran M, Fawzi A, Shahin A (2017) Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs standard PCNL for management of renal stones in the flank-free modified supine position: single-center experience. Urolithiasis 45(6):585–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-017-0966-1. (Epub 2017 Feb 22 PMID: 28229197)CrossRefPubMed Sakr A, Salem E, Kamel M, Desoky E, Ragab A, Omran M, Fawzi A, Shahin A (2017) Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs standard PCNL for management of renal stones in the flank-free modified supine position: single-center experience. Urolithiasis 45(6):585–589. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00240-017-0966-1. (Epub 2017 Feb 22 PMID: 28229197)CrossRefPubMed
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Güler A, Erbin A, Ucpinar B, Savun M, Sarilar O, Akbulut MF (2019) Comparison of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the treatment of large kidney stones: a randomized prospective study. Urolithiasis 47(3):289–295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-018-1061-y. (Epub 2018 Jun 1 PMID: 29858913)CrossRefPubMed Güler A, Erbin A, Ucpinar B, Savun M, Sarilar O, Akbulut MF (2019) Comparison of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the treatment of large kidney stones: a randomized prospective study. Urolithiasis 47(3):289–295. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00240-018-1061-y. (Epub 2018 Jun 1 PMID: 29858913)CrossRefPubMed
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Zeng G, Cai C, Duan X, Xu X, Mao H, Li X, Nie Y, Xie J, Li J, Lu J, Zou X, Mo J, Li C, Li J, Wang W, Yu Y, Fei X, Gu X, Chen J, Kong X, Pang J, Zhu W, Zhao Z, Wu W, Sun H, Liu Y, la Rosette J (2021) Mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy is a noninferior modality to standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the management of 20–40mm renal calculi: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Eur Urol 79(1):114–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.026. (Epub 2020 Sep 29 PMID: 32994063)CrossRefPubMed Zeng G, Cai C, Duan X, Xu X, Mao H, Li X, Nie Y, Xie J, Li J, Lu J, Zou X, Mo J, Li C, Li J, Wang W, Yu Y, Fei X, Gu X, Chen J, Kong X, Pang J, Zhu W, Zhao Z, Wu W, Sun H, Liu Y, la Rosette J (2021) Mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy is a noninferior modality to standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the management of 20–40mm renal calculi: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Eur Urol 79(1):114–121. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​j.​eururo.​2020.​09.​026. (Epub 2020 Sep 29 PMID: 32994063)CrossRefPubMed
29.
Zurück zum Zitat de la Rosette J, Assimos D, Desai M, Gutierrez J, Lingeman J, Scarpa R, Tefekli A, CROES PCNL Study Group (2011) The Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Global Study: indications, complications, and outcomes in 5803 patients. J Endourol 25(1):11–17. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2010.0424. (PMID: 21247286)CrossRefPubMed de la Rosette J, Assimos D, Desai M, Gutierrez J, Lingeman J, Scarpa R, Tefekli A, CROES PCNL Study Group (2011) The Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Global Study: indications, complications, and outcomes in 5803 patients. J Endourol 25(1):11–17. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1089/​end.​2010.​0424. (PMID: 21247286)CrossRefPubMed
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Mykoniatis I, Pietropaolo A, Pyrgidis N, Tishukov M, Anastasiadis A, Juliebø-Jones P, Keller EX, Talso M, Tailly T, Kalidonis P, Young Academic Urologists of the European Association of Urology-Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Party (2022) Mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the management of renal stones over 2 cm: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Minerva Urol Nephrol. 74(4):409–417. https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6051.22.04678-X. (Epub 2022 Feb 11. PMID: 35147386)CrossRefPubMed Mykoniatis I, Pietropaolo A, Pyrgidis N, Tishukov M, Anastasiadis A, Juliebø-Jones P, Keller EX, Talso M, Tailly T, Kalidonis P, Young Academic Urologists of the European Association of Urology-Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Party (2022) Mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the management of renal stones over 2 cm: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Minerva Urol Nephrol. 74(4):409–417. https://​doi.​org/​10.​23736/​S2724-6051.​22.​04678-X. (Epub 2022 Feb 11. PMID: 35147386)CrossRefPubMed
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Ruhayel Y, Tepeler A, Dabestani S, MacLennan S, Petřík A, Sarica K, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, Straub M, Türk C, Yuan Y, Knoll T (2017) Tract sizes in miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review from the European Association of Urology Urolithiasis Guidelines Panel. Eur Urol 72(2):220–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2017.01.046. (Epub 2017 Feb 23; PMID: 28237786)CrossRefPubMed Ruhayel Y, Tepeler A, Dabestani S, MacLennan S, Petřík A, Sarica K, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, Straub M, Türk C, Yuan Y, Knoll T (2017) Tract sizes in miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review from the European Association of Urology Urolithiasis Guidelines Panel. Eur Urol 72(2):220–235. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​j.​eururo.​2017.​01.​046. (Epub 2017 Feb 23; PMID: 28237786)CrossRefPubMed
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Geraghty RM, Davis NF, Tzelves L, Lombardo R, Yuan C, thomas K, petrik a, neisius a, türk c, gambaro g, skolarikos a, somani bk (2023) best practice in interventional management of urolithiasis: an update from the European Association of Urology Guidelines Panel for Urolithiasis 2022. Eur Urol Focus 9(1):199–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2022.06.014. (Epub 2022 Aug 1 PMID: 35927160)CrossRefPubMed Geraghty RM, Davis NF, Tzelves L, Lombardo R, Yuan C, thomas K, petrik a, neisius a, türk c, gambaro g, skolarikos a, somani bk (2023) best practice in interventional management of urolithiasis: an update from the European Association of Urology Guidelines Panel for Urolithiasis 2022. Eur Urol Focus 9(1):199–208. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​j.​euf.​2022.​06.​014. (Epub 2022 Aug 1 PMID: 35927160)CrossRefPubMed
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Zeng G, Traxer O, Zhong W, Osther P, Pearle MS, Preminger GM, Mazzon G, Seitz C, Geavlete P, Fiori C, Ghani KR, Chew BH, Git KA, Vicentini FC, Papatsoris A, Brehmer M, Martinez JL, Cheng J, Cheng F, Gao X, Gadzhiev N, Pietropaolo A, Proietti S, Ye Z, Sarica K (2023) International alliance of urolithiasis guideline on retrograde intrarenal surgery. BJU Int 131(2):153–164. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.15836. (Epub 2022 Jul 12 PMID: 35733358)CrossRefPubMed Zeng G, Traxer O, Zhong W, Osther P, Pearle MS, Preminger GM, Mazzon G, Seitz C, Geavlete P, Fiori C, Ghani KR, Chew BH, Git KA, Vicentini FC, Papatsoris A, Brehmer M, Martinez JL, Cheng J, Cheng F, Gao X, Gadzhiev N, Pietropaolo A, Proietti S, Ye Z, Sarica K (2023) International alliance of urolithiasis guideline on retrograde intrarenal surgery. BJU Int 131(2):153–164. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​bju.​15836. (Epub 2022 Jul 12 PMID: 35733358)CrossRefPubMed
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Zeng G, Zhong W, Pearle M, Choong S, Chew B, Skolarikos A, Liatsikos E, Pal SK, Lahme S, Durutovic O, Farahat Y, Khadgi S, Desai M, Chi T, Smith D, Hoznek A, Papatsoris A, Desai J, Mazzon G, Somani B, Eisner B, Scoffone CM, Nguyen D, Ferretti S, Giusti G, Saltirov I, Maroccolo MV, Gökce MI, Straub M, Bernardo N, Lantin PL, Saulat S, Gamal W, Denstedt J, Ye Z, Sarica K (2022) European Association of Urology Section of urolithiasis and international alliance of urolithiasis Joint Consensus on Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol Focus 8(2):588–597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2021.03.008. (Epub 2021 Mar 23 PMID: 33741299)CrossRefPubMed Zeng G, Zhong W, Pearle M, Choong S, Chew B, Skolarikos A, Liatsikos E, Pal SK, Lahme S, Durutovic O, Farahat Y, Khadgi S, Desai M, Chi T, Smith D, Hoznek A, Papatsoris A, Desai J, Mazzon G, Somani B, Eisner B, Scoffone CM, Nguyen D, Ferretti S, Giusti G, Saltirov I, Maroccolo MV, Gökce MI, Straub M, Bernardo N, Lantin PL, Saulat S, Gamal W, Denstedt J, Ye Z, Sarica K (2022) European Association of Urology Section of urolithiasis and international alliance of urolithiasis Joint Consensus on Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol Focus 8(2):588–597. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​j.​euf.​2021.​03.​008. (Epub 2021 Mar 23 PMID: 33741299)CrossRefPubMed
37.
39.
Zurück zum Zitat Somani BK, Giusti G, Sun Y, Osther PJ, Frank M, De Sio M, Turna B, de la Rosette J (2017) Complications associated with ureterorenoscopy (URS) related to treatment of urolithiasis: the Clinical Research Office of Endourological Society URS Global study. World J Urol 35(4):675–681. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-016-1909-0. (Epub 2016 Aug 4. PMID: 27492012; PMCID: PMC5364249)CrossRefPubMed Somani BK, Giusti G, Sun Y, Osther PJ, Frank M, De Sio M, Turna B, de la Rosette J (2017) Complications associated with ureterorenoscopy (URS) related to treatment of urolithiasis: the Clinical Research Office of Endourological Society URS Global study. World J Urol 35(4):675–681. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00345-016-1909-0. (Epub 2016 Aug 4. PMID: 27492012; PMCID: PMC5364249)CrossRefPubMed
42.
Zurück zum Zitat Juan Daels FP (2020) Gonzalez MS. In: Zeng G, Sarica K (eds) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Springer, Singapore, pp 265–279 Juan Daels FP (2020) Gonzalez MS. In: Zeng G, Sarica K (eds) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Springer, Singapore, pp 265–279
44.
Zurück zum Zitat Perrella R, Vicentini FC, Paro ED, Torricelli FCM, Marchini GS, Danilovic A, Batagello CA, Mota PKV, Ferreira DB, Cohen DJ, Murta CB, Claro JFA, Giusti G, Monga M, Nahas WC, Srougi M, Mazzucchi E (2022) Supine versus prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy for complex stones: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. J Urol 207(3):647–656. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002291. (Epub 2021 Oct 25 PMID: 34694154)CrossRefPubMed Perrella R, Vicentini FC, Paro ED, Torricelli FCM, Marchini GS, Danilovic A, Batagello CA, Mota PKV, Ferreira DB, Cohen DJ, Murta CB, Claro JFA, Giusti G, Monga M, Nahas WC, Srougi M, Mazzucchi E (2022) Supine versus prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy for complex stones: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. J Urol 207(3):647–656. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1097/​JU.​0000000000002291​. (Epub 2021 Oct 25 PMID: 34694154)CrossRefPubMed
45.
Zurück zum Zitat Gauhar V, Traxer O, García Rojo E, Scarcella S, Pavia MP, Chan VW, Pretore E, Wroclawski ML, Corrales M, Tiong HY, Lim EJ, Teoh JY, Heng CT, de la Rosette J, Somani BK, Castellani D (2022) Complications and outcomes of tubeless versus nephrostomy tube in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Urolithiasis. 50(5):511–522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-022-01337-y. (Epub 2022 Jun 8. PMID: 35674819; PMCID: PMC9468100)CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Gauhar V, Traxer O, García Rojo E, Scarcella S, Pavia MP, Chan VW, Pretore E, Wroclawski ML, Corrales M, Tiong HY, Lim EJ, Teoh JY, Heng CT, de la Rosette J, Somani BK, Castellani D (2022) Complications and outcomes of tubeless versus nephrostomy tube in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Urolithiasis. 50(5):511–522. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00240-022-01337-y. (Epub 2022 Jun 8. PMID: 35674819; PMCID: PMC9468100)CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
47.
Zurück zum Zitat Scoffone CM, Hoznek A, Maria Cracco CM (2020) Kidney drainage and percutaneous tract closure. In: Zeng G, Sarica K (eds) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Springer, Singapore, pp 199–208 Scoffone CM, Hoznek A, Maria Cracco CM (2020) Kidney drainage and percutaneous tract closure. In: Zeng G, Sarica K (eds) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Springer, Singapore, pp 199–208
48.
Zurück zum Zitat Barone B, Crocetto F, Vitale R, Di Domenico D, Caputo V, Romano F, De Luca L, Bada M, Imbimbo C, Prezioso D (2020) Retrograde intra renal surgery versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal stones > 2 cm. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Minerva Urol Nefrol 72(4):441–450. https://doi.org/10.23736/S0393-2249.20.03721-2. (Epub 2020 Feb 19. PMID: 32083423)CrossRefPubMed Barone B, Crocetto F, Vitale R, Di Domenico D, Caputo V, Romano F, De Luca L, Bada M, Imbimbo C, Prezioso D (2020) Retrograde intra renal surgery versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal stones > 2 cm. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Minerva Urol Nefrol 72(4):441–450. https://​doi.​org/​10.​23736/​S0393-2249.​20.​03721-2. (Epub 2020 Feb 19. PMID: 32083423)CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Efficacy and safety of various endosurgical procedures for management of large renal stone: a systemic review and network meta-analysis of randomised control trials
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2023
Erschienen in
Urolithiasis / Ausgabe 1/2023
Print ISSN: 2194-7228
Elektronische ISSN: 2194-7236
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-023-01459-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2023

Urolithiasis 1/2023 Zur Ausgabe

Bestrahlung nach Prostatektomie: mehr Schaden als Nutzen?

02.05.2024 Prostatakarzinom Nachrichten

Eine adjuvante Radiotherapie nach radikaler Prostata-Op. bringt den Betroffenen wahrscheinlich keinen Vorteil. Im Gegenteil: Durch die Bestrahlung steigt offenbar das Risiko für Harn- und Stuhlinkontinenz.

D-Mannose ohne Nutzen in der Prävention von HWI-Rezidiven

D-Mannose, eine Hoffnungsträgerin in der Rezidivprophylaxe von Harnwegsinfektionen, hat in einer Studie nicht mehr bewirken können als ein Placebo. Die Empfehlung zur Einnahme entfalle damit, so die Autoren.

Ambulantisierung: Erste Erfahrungen mit dem Hybrid-DRG

02.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Die Hybrid-DRG-Verordnung soll dazu führen, dass mehr chirurgische Eingriffe ambulant durchgeführt werden, wie es in anderen Ländern schon länger üblich ist. Die gleiche Vergütung im ambulanten und stationären Sektor hatten Niedergelassene schon lange gefordert. Aber die Umsetzung bereitet ihnen doch Kopfzerbrechen.

Sind Frauen die fähigeren Ärzte?

30.04.2024 Gendermedizin Nachrichten

Patienten, die von Ärztinnen behandelt werden, dürfen offenbar auf bessere Therapieergebnisse hoffen als Patienten von Ärzten. Besonders scheint das auf weibliche Kranke zuzutreffen, wie eine Studie zeigt.

Update Urologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.