Comparison of vacuum-assisted sheaths and normal sheaths in minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract Background A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to compare the safety and efficacy of vacuum-assisted sheaths and conventional sheaths in minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) in the treatment of nephrolithiasis. Methods PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, EBSCO...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
BMC
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/6c5e2d4ac8e345899143e53e6f6d088b |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | Abstract Background A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to compare the safety and efficacy of vacuum-assisted sheaths and conventional sheaths in minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) in the treatment of nephrolithiasis. Methods PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library databases (updated March 2021) were used to search for studies assessing the effect of vacuum-assisted sheaths in patients who underwent MPCNL. The search strategy and study selection processes were implemented in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Result Three randomized controlled trials and two case-controlled trials that satisfied the inclusion criteria were enrolled in this meta-analysis. Overall, the stone-free rate (SFR) in patients who underwent vacuum-assisted sheaths was significantly higher than that in patients who underwent conventional sheaths (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.04, 1.46, P = 0.02), with significant heterogeneity among the studies (I2 = 72%, P = 0.03). In terms of the outcome of complications, vacuum-assisted sheath could bring a benefit to the postoperative infection rate (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.33, 0.70, P < 0.00001) with insignificant heterogeneity among the studies (I2 = 0%, P = 0.68). There was no significant difference in the blood transfusion rate (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.07, 1.73, P = 0.17), with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 66%, P = 0.35). Three studies contained operative time data, and the results indicated that the vacuum-assisted sheath led to a shorter operative time (MD = − 15.74; 95% CI − 1944, − 12.04, P < 0.00001) with insignificant heterogeneity (I2 = 0%, P = 0.91). Conclusion The application of a vacuum-assisted sheath in MPCNL improves the safety and efficiency compared to the conventional sheath. A vacuum-assisted sheath significantly increases the SFR while reducing operative time and postoperative infection. |
|---|