Comparison of safety and efficacy of different positions in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Various new positions for percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) were proposed to reduce the limitations of the traditional position. This study was aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the different PCNL positions. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to 18 April 2023. The authors collected five common surgical positions used for PCNL: oblique supine position (OSP), supine position (SP), flank position (FP), split-leg oblique supine/flank position (SLP), and prone position (PP). Paired and network meta-analysis were conducted to compare relevant outcomes, including complications, operative time, stone-free rates, hospital stay, and hemoglobin loss among these different positions. RESULTS: The study included 17 RCTs with a total of 1841 patients. The result demonstrated that SLP significantly outperformed in terms of decreasing operation time (FP vs SLP MD- MD-41.65; OSP vs SLP MD 28.97; PP vs SLP MD 34.94), hospital stay, and hemoglobin loss. Ranking probabilities showed SLP had highest stone-free rate. Prone position was more likely to occur complications than others. Based on SMAA model, the benefit-risk analysis suggested the SLP was the optimal position in PCNL. CONCLUSIONS: For PCNL, the split-leg, flank, supine, and OSPs are as secure as the prone position. Further RCTs are necessary to confirm the outstanding safety and efficacy of split-leg position. Besides, the position should be selected regard for the patient's demands, the surgeon's preference and learning curve.

Comparative efficacy and safety of different minimal invasive pyeloplasty in treating patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: In recent years, the minimally invasive surgical treatment methods of ureteropelvic junctional obstruction (UPJO) have been diverse, but its approach and choice of surgical method are controversial. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of minimally invasive surgeries for UPJO, which included robotic or laparoscopic pyeloplasty, via the retroperitoneal or transperitoneal approach. METHODS: We searched relevant RCTs in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and CNKI. To assess the results of operative time, complications and success rate, pairwise, and NMA were carried out. The models for analyses were performed by Revman 5.3, Addis V1.16.8 and R software. RESULTS: A total of 6 RCTs were included in this study involving four types of surgeries: transperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty (T-LP), retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty (R-LP), robot-assisted transperitoneal pyeloplasty (T-RALP), and robot-assisted retroperitoneal pyeloplasty (R-RALP). This study consisted of 381 patients overall. T-RALP had a quicker operational duration (SMD = 1.67, 95% CI 0.27-3.07, P = 0.02) than T-LP. According to the NMA's consistency model, T-RALP improved the surgical success rate more than T-LP (RR = 6303.19, CI 1.28 to 1.47 × 1011). Ranking probabilities indicated that RALP could be the better option than LP and retroperitoneal approach was comparable to transperitoneal approach. All procedures had high surgical success rates and few complications. CONCLUSION: Outcomes for four surgical approaches used in the UPJO were comparable, with T-RALP being the most recommended approach. Selection between the transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches primarily depended on the surgeon's preference. Higher quality evidence is needed to further enhance the result.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of holmium laser with the Moses technology and regular mode for stone treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: As a new pulse modality of holmium laser in retrograde intrarenal stone surgery, the MOSES technique can reduce the possibility of stone drifting and help to powder kidney stones in vitro and in animal experiments. However, there remains controversy about whether the MOSES mode needs to be used instead of the regular mode in clinical practice. This meta-review was conducted to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of MOSES technology for stone disease. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and CNKI were searched for relevant studies until September 2022, with 1 RCT and 6 nonrandomized studies included. We pulled data on adverse events, success rates and operative time to analyze based on the random effect model. RESULTS: We found that using MOSES mode could shorten the operative time (standard mean difference [SMD] - 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 0.79 to - 0.08; P = 0.016) than regular mode especially in a small sample study or in the Asian area. When the number of women is smaller than the number of men, the reduction of the duration was also significant. Stone-free rates of the two modes had no difference (relative risk [RR] 1.06; 95% CI 0.99-1.12; P = 0.30), and there was no publication bias. In terms of safety, no significant difference in complications was detected between the two approaches (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.48-1.53; P = 0.81) without significant heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: MOSES mode holmium laser was superior to the regular mode laser in terms of procedure time. There was no large disparity in stone-free rates or complications between the two modes. However, our conclusions should be confirmed in prospective studies with high evidence.

Comparison of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound vs Conventional Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Nondilated Collecting System: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Background: It has been demonstrated that ultrasound (US)-guided renal collecting system access during percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is efficient and secure. The puncture success rate fell to 82%, and the total complication rate rose to 15% in kidneys with nondilated collecting systems. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) has been used in PCNL techniques to address this issue. Methods: We did this meta-analysis following the preferred reporting criteria for systematic reviews and meta-analysis to combine the data of published studies to compare the CEUS-guided PCNL and the standard US-guided PCNL (PRISMA). For relevant literature, we searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CKNI, and the Cochrane Library. The final inclusion date for this meta-analysis was May 1, 2022, and three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were finally included. RevMan V5.4.1 was used in this work. Standard mean difference (SMD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was utilized as the major estimate in the synthesis of continuous data, while odds ratio (OR) with a 95% CI was synthesized as the main estimate in the synthesis of discontinuous data. Results: We found that compared with traditional US-guided PCNL, CEUS-guided PCNL could offer more benefits in terms of single-needle success rate (OR: 3.02, 95% CI: 1.62 to 5.61, p = 0.0005), shorter puncture time (SMD: -1.33, 95% CI: -2.06 to -0.60, p = 0.0004), shorter hospital stays (SMD: -0.37, 95% CI: -0.60 to -0.13, p = 0.002), and a better stone clearance rate (OR: 2.32, 95% CI: 1.15 to 4.68. p = 0.02). Although the PCNL complication rate after surgery was not significantly reduced by the CEUS technique (overall complication: OR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.37 to 1.30, p = 0.25. Grade 1/2 complication: OR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.41 to 1.53, p = 0.48; Grade 3/4 complication: OR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.10 to 1.98, p = 0.28), it could reduce hemoglobin dropping compared with conventional US-guided PCNL (SMD: -0.82, 95% CI: -1.06 to -0.58, p < 0.001). Conclusion: The CEUS-guided PCNL technique is superior to the US-guided PCNL, according to almost all synthesized data. Additional randomized studies are still required.