Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Surgical approaches for treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction - a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Uhlig, Annemarie; Uhlig, Johannes; Trojan, Lutz; Hinterthaner, Marc; von Hammerstein-Equord, Alexander; Strauss, Arne.
Afiliación
  • Uhlig A; Department of Urology, University Medical Center Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany. annemarie.uhlig@med.uni-goettingen.de.
  • Uhlig J; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany.
  • Trojan L; Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
  • Hinterthaner M; Department of Urology, University Medical Center Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany.
  • von Hammerstein-Equord A; Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Medical Center Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany.
  • Strauss A; Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Medical Center Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany.
BMC Urol ; 19(1): 112, 2019 Nov 11.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31711468
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Multiple surgical treatment options are available for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). The aim of this study is to compare the most frequently used technics in a comprehensive network approach.

METHODS:

A systematic literature search of the EMBASE, MEDLINE and COCHRANE libraries was conducted in January 2018. Publications were included that evaluated at least two of the following surgical techniques open pyeloplasty (OP), endopyelotomy (EP), laparoscopic (LP) and robot assisted pyeloplasty (RP). Main outcomes were operative success, complications, urinary leakage, re-operation, transfusion rate, operating time, and length of stay. Network meta-analyses with random effects models simultaneously assessed effectiveness of all surgical techniques.

RESULTS:

A total of 26 studies including 3143 patients were analyzed. Compared with RP, EP and LP showed lower operative success rates (EP OR = 0.09, 95%CI0.05-0.19; p < 0.001; LP OR = 0.51, 95%CI0.31-0.84; p = 0.008). Compared with OP, LP and RP had lower risk for complications (LP OR = 0.62; 95%CI0.41-0.95; p = 0.027; RP OR = 0.41; 95%CI0.22-0.79; p = 0.007). Compared with RP, no significant differences were detected for urinary leakage or re-operation, transfusion rates. Compared with EP, RP yielded longer operating time (mean = 102.87 min, 95%CI41.79 min-163.95 min, p = < 0.001). Further significant differences in operating times were detected when comparing LP to EP (mean = 115.13 min, 95%CI65.63 min-164.63 min, p = < 0.001) and OP to EP (mean = 91.96 min, 95%CI32.33 min-151.58 min, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS:

Multiple surgical techniques are available for treatment of UPJO. RP has the highest rates of operative success and as well as LP lower complication rates than OP. Although surgical outcomes are worse for EP, its operating time is shorter than OP, RP, and LP. Surgeons should consider these findings when selecting the optimal treatment method for individual patients.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Obstrucción Ureteral / Pelvis Renal Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: BMC Urol Asunto de la revista: UROLOGIA Año: 2019 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Alemania

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Obstrucción Ureteral / Pelvis Renal Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: BMC Urol Asunto de la revista: UROLOGIA Año: 2019 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Alemania