Dataset Information

Comparison of postoperative outcomes of mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Our study was aimed to evaluate the postoperative outcomes of Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (Mini-PCNL) and Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (Standard-PCNL) to determine the optimum option for patients with renal calculi. For publications published between January 2010 and April 2021, a comprehensive search of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases was done. The literatures were chosen based on the criteria for inclusion and exclusion. After the data were retrieved and the quality was assessed, the meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager Software (RevMan 5.4.1, Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). We selected 20 trials with a total of 4953 people out of 322 studies. There were 2567 patients treated with Mini-PCNL and 2386 patients treated with Standard-PCNL. Meta-analysis results showed no difference in stone-free rates (SFR, P = 0.93), fever (P = 0.83), and postoperative pain (VAS score) (P = 0.21) between Mini-PCNL and Standard-PCNL. Patients in the Mini-PCNL group experienced shorter hospital stay (P < 0.0001), less hemoglobin drop (P < 0.00001), less blood transfusion (P < 0.00001), higher postoperative tubeless (P = 0.0002), and fewer complications including bleeding (P = 0.01), perforation (P = 0.03), and leakage (P = 0.01). Compared with Standard-PCNL, operative time was longer in the Mini-PCNL group (P = 0.0005). Mini-PCNL had a shorter hospital stay, less hemoglobin drop, less blood transfusion, greater postoperative tubeless, fewer complications, and a longer operational time when compared to Standard-PCNL. SFR, fever, and postoperative pain were similar in both of them. Mini-PCNL may be a superior option for patients with proper size renal calculi.

SUBMITTER: Wan C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9467966 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of postoperative outcomes of mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis.

Wan Chuanping C Wang Daoqi D Xiang Jiajia J Yang Bin B Xu Jinming J Zhou Guiming G Zhou Yuan Y Zhao Yuan Y Zhong Jiao J Liu Jianhe J

Urolithiasis 20220811 5

Our study was aimed to evaluate the postoperative outcomes of Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (Mini-PCNL) and Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (Standard-PCNL) to determine the optimum option for patients with renal calculi. For publications published between January 2010 and April 2021, a comprehensive search of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases was done. The literatures were chosen based on the criteria for inclusion and exclusion. After the data were ret ...[more]

PMID: 35953608

Similar Datasets

Project description:The aim of this study was to systematically compare the perioperative outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with or without previous ipsilateral open renal surgery (POS).Systematic searches of the PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases were used to identify relevant studies, and, following literature screening and data extraction, a meta-analysis was performed.17 retrospective cohort studies involving 4833 procedures (4784 patients) were included. No statistically significant differences were observed between patients with or without POS in terms of supracostal access; single/multiple tracts; metal dilator need; time required to access the collecting system; fluoroscopic duration; demand for analgesics; hospital stay; final stone-free rate; and risk of developing certain complications (eg, fever, haemorrhage, haemo/hydro/pneumothorax, blood transfusion, urinary tract infection and sepsis) as well as regarding the risk of total complications. Patients with POS, however, had a greater drop in haemoglobin (weighted mean difference (WMD), 1.78 g/L; 95% CI 1.09 to 2.47; p<0.00001) and higher risk of bleeding that required angiographic embolisation (relative risk (RR), 3.73; 95% CI 1.36 to 10.21; p=0.01). In addition, patients with POS also had a lower initial stone-free rate (RR, 0.96; 95% CI 0.92 to 0.99; p=0.007) and more secondary treatment (RR, 1.61; 95% CI 1.09 to 2.37; p=0.02). Sensitivity analysis produced comparable results except for differences in operative time and initial stone-free rate, which did, however, prove to be statistically insignificant (p=0.16 and 0.69, respectively).Current evidence suggests that percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with POS is associated with a significantly greater drop in haemoglobin, higher risk of requiring angiographic embolisation and auxiliary procedures, potentially longer operative time, and lower initial stone-free rate than percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients without POS.

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness and safety of regional anesthesia (RA) and general anesthesia (GA) for percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL).Patients and methodsPubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, and the Web of Knowledge databases were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. After literature screening and data extraction, a meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsEight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and six non-randomized controlled trials (nRCTs) involving 2270 patients were included. Patients receiving RA were associated with shorter operative time (-6.22 min; 95%CI, -9.70 to -2.75; p = 0.0005), lower visual analgesic score on the first and third postoperative day (WMD, -2.62; 95%CI, -3.04 to -2.19; p < 0.00001 WMD, -0.38; 95%CI, -0.58 to -0.18; p = 0.0002), less analgesic requirements (WMD, -59.40 mg; 95%CI, -78.39 to -40.40; p<0.00001), shorter hospitalization (WMD, -0.36d; 95%CI, -0.66 to -0.05; p = 0.02), less blood transfusion (RR, 0.61; 95%CI, 0.41 to 0.93; p = 0.02), fewer modified Clavion-Dindo Grade II (RR, 0.56; 95%CI, 0.37 to 0.83; p = 0.005), Grade III or above postoperative complications (RR, 0.51; 95%CI, 0.33 to 0.77; p = 0.001), and potential benefits of less fever (RR, 0.79; 95%CI, 0.61 to 1.02; p = 0.07), nausea or vomiting (RR, 0.54; 95%CI, 0.20 to 1.46; p = 0.23), whereas more intraoperative hypotension (RR, 3.13; 95%CI, 1.76 to 5.59; p = 0.0001) when compared with patients receiving GA. When nRCTs were excluded, most of the results were stable but the significant differences were no longer detectable in blood transfusion, Grade II and more severe complications. No significant difference in the total postoperative complications and stone-free rate were found.ConclusionsCurrent evidence suggests that both RA and GA can provide safe and effective anesthesia for PNL in carefully evaluated and selected patients. Each anesthesia technique has its own advantages but some aspects still remain unclear and need to be explored in future studies.

Dataset Information

Comparison of postoperative outcomes of mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis.

Publications

Comparison of postoperative outcomes of mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets